Grand Jury Justice | The Petition, the People, the Public Record

Petition progress

Every signature brings us closer.

3,740

signatures collected

1,260

still needed

74.8% of goal reachedGoal: 5,000 signatures

Add your signature by November 19.Updated November 2, 2026

01 / Signature collection deadline

Every day counts.

Thursday, November 19, 2026

DEADLINE · 4:30 PM Central

TIME REMAINING● LIVE COUNTDOWN

—Days

—Hours

—Minutes

—Seconds

Original handwritten signatures are required.Where to sign

02 / Signing location

A signature.
A place to begin.

Find a Tulsa County signing location and plan your visit.

01TULSA · SOUTH YALE

Cellular Repair
& Exchange

1913 S. Yale Ave., Tulsa, OK
Next to Subway

Monday–Friday: 10 AM–7 PM
Saturday: 10 AM–5 PM
Sunday: Closed

Get directions

Collection through November 19, 2026.

03 / News coverage

The petition in focus.

News reports, interviews, and independent audio commentary on the petition.

A 2 News reporter holds the petition outside the Tulsa County courthouse

2 NEWS / KJRH

04 / Original petition

The record comes first.

Read the filed petition and explore its eleven inquiry areas.

01Read the filed petition 02Explore the inquiry areas 03Read the plain-English summary

Editorial illustration of stacked petition paperwork and exhibit tabs on a desk

Primary source / Filed document

Full filed petition PDF

Filed October 1, 2026 · 33 pages

Read the original petition in full, including the requests for investigation and related references.

Open complete document

Grand Jury Justice participants gathered outside the Oklahoma State Capitol

Inquiry summaries

A · Tulsa County Juvenile Detention Center

The petition asks what the DA’s Office knew about reported assaults, sexual misconduct, staffing failures, and state inspection findings at the facility from 2022 to 2024, and whether it advised county commissioners that the county bore no responsibility. It asks whether that advice delayed intervention, permitted further harm, or increased the county’s liability.

Question for investigation

Did the Office know about dangerous conditions, give inaccurate advice about county responsibility, or fail to recommend protective action?

The filing establishes that these questions and records requests were made. It does not establish that the Office caused harm or concealed complaints.

B · State v. Hankins and employee credibility

The petition asks whether a prosecutor gave inaccurate sworn testimony in a case that ended in acquittal, and whether the Office reviewed or disclosed those credibility concerns in other cases. It also asks whether she was later promoted despite them, while noting the public record does not itself establish perjury.

Question for investigation

Did the testimony contain material inaccuracies, and did the Office properly review and disclose any resulting credibility concerns?

The petition itself expressly says the public record it describes does not by itself establish perjury or entrapment. Those conclusions are not independently established in this explorer.

C · April Wilkens proceedings

The petition asks whether two prosecutors bought Ms. Wilkens’ former home, and whether officials attended a social event there, while the Office was litigating her case, creating a conflict that required disclosure or recusal. It also asks about a reported text from the DA saying he was “busy keeping April Wilkens in prison” and about any judicial communications held without her counsel present.

Question for investigation

Did any relationship, financial interest, or communication require disclosure, screening, recusal, or independent review?

The filing calls for complete records and testimony before determining whether misconduct occurred. The property, messages, and relationships are not independently verified here.

D · Rosario Chico prosecution

The petition asks whether the DA personally initiated a child-stealing prosecution of Ms. Chico after receiving a note from a guardian ad litem who may have been a political supporter, and whether that note was improperly withheld from the defense. It also asks how her domestic violence claims were evaluated and why charges against her alleged abuser were dropped.

Question for investigation

Were charging and disclosure decisions independent and fair, and was a possible conflict properly handled?

The filing’s questions do not establish improper influence, a disclosure violation, or a conflict. The note and case files are not independently examined in this explorer.

E · Henry Jamerson post-conviction review

The petition asks whether the Office told a court that biological evidence was unavailable without adequately searching for it. It also asks why the Office kept opposing relief after a witness recanted and DNA testing excluded Mr. Jamerson.

Question for investigation

Did the Office diligently locate evidence, correct inaccurate statements, and reassess the case in good faith?

The DNA reports, recantation materials, and underlying court rulings are not supplied for independent verification here. Their description in the petition is not itself proof of official misconduct.

F · Open records and private communications

The petition asks whether the Office delayed, narrowed, or inadequately searched for public records, including requests about the Glossip, Wilkens, and detention center matters. It also asks whether public business was conducted on personal phones, private email, or encrypted apps and not disclosed, an issue raised in a pending 2026 lawsuit.

Question for investigation

Were record searches and retention practices adequate, and was any withholding legally justified?

This explorer verifies the filing’s reference to that lawsuit, not its current status or outcome. The petition alone does not establish an unlawful withholding or deletion.

G · Oklahoma Survivors' Act waivers

The petition asks whether the Office used plea documents asking defendants to give up future relief under the Oklahoma Survivors’ Act, a law meant for people whose crimes were linked to abuse. It asks who approved the language, how often it was used, and whether defendants, judges, and defense counsel were informed.

Question for investigation

Was waiver language used, how widely was it used, and was its legality and effect properly evaluated and explained?

The plea form and completed examples are requested materials, not evidence reproduced here. Their existence, use, or legality is not independently determined by this explorer.

H · Public resources in the 2026 re-election campaign

The petition asks whether employees did campaign work on county time or with county equipment, and whether they were pressured to participate or treated differently based on their support. It distinguishes this from voluntary political activity on employees’ own time.

Question for investigation

Was campaign activity voluntary and done on personal time, or was it directed, coerced, or supported with public resources?

Political support or participation alone does not establish the concerns raised here. This explorer does not independently verify work time, coercion, equipment use, or campaign activity.

I · Office administration and supervision

Citing former employees and a March 2026 campaign remark that the DA “will not lead from a desk,” the petition asks how often he is present and performing his administrative duties. It also asks whether inadequate supervision contributed to the other problems described.

Question for investigation

Do records and witness accounts support or refute the reported absences, and did any lack of supervision contribute to the other concerns?

The reported absences and remark are not independently verified here. Being away from an office is not, by itself, established neglect of official duties.

J · Tulsa Little League litigation

The petition asks whether legal advice to county commissioners about the Tulsa Little League and LaFortune Park lawsuit was delayed or shaped by the DA’s re-election campaign. It also asks whether related executive sessions complied with the Open Meeting Act.

Question for investigation

Did campaign considerations affect legal advice or litigation timing, and were related executive sessions properly conducted?

The filing does not itself establish that litigation was delayed for campaign reasons or that a meeting violated the law. The underlying meeting and litigation records are not verified here.

K · Campaign relationships and case outcomes

The petition asks whether contributions or endorsements from defense attorneys influenced plea deals and sentencing for their clients, focusing on the Binney and Cole cases, and whether victims were properly notified. It states these relationships do not, by themselves, prove improper influence.

Question for investigation

Did political support affect official decisions, or do the full records and comparable cases support an independent explanation?

Contributions, endorsements, and favorable outcomes do not by themselves prove improper influence. This explorer does not independently establish a connection or determine whether any outcome was unlawful.

05 / Petition explorer

Inside the petition.

Explore summaries of the petition’s eleven inquiry areas.

.ix-folio-wrap{display:none!important}

A · Tulsa County Juvenile Detention Center

At a glance

Question for investigation

Did the Office know about dangerous conditions, give inaccurate advice about county responsibility, or fail to recommend protective action?

Open the original inquiry pages

B · State v. Hankins and employee credibility

At a glance

Question for investigation

Did the testimony contain material inaccuracies, and did the Office properly review and disclose any resulting credibility concerns?

Open the original inquiry pages

C · April Wilkens proceedings

At a glance

Question for investigation

Did any relationship, financial interest, or communication require disclosure, screening, recusal, or independent review?

Open the original inquiry pages

D · Rosario Chico prosecution

At a glance

Question for investigation

Were charging and disclosure decisions independent and fair, and was a possible conflict properly handled?

Open the original inquiry pages

E · Henry Jamerson post-conviction review

At a glance

Question for investigation

Did the Office diligently locate evidence, correct inaccurate statements, and reassess the case in good faith?

Open the original inquiry pages

F · Open records and private communications

At a glance

Question for investigation

Were record searches and retention practices adequate, and was any withholding legally justified?

Open the original inquiry pages

G · Oklahoma Survivors' Act waivers

At a glance

Question for investigation

Was waiver language used, how widely was it used, and was its legality and effect properly evaluated and explained?

Open the original inquiry pages

H · Public resources in the 2026 re-election campaign

At a glance

Question for investigation

Was campaign activity voluntary and done on personal time, or was it directed, coerced, or supported with public resources?

Open the original inquiry pages

I · Office administration and supervision

At a glance

Question for investigation

Do records and witness accounts support or refute the reported absences, and did any lack of supervision contribute to the other concerns?

Open the original inquiry pages

J · Tulsa Little League litigation

At a glance

Question for investigation

Did campaign considerations affect legal advice or litigation timing, and were related executive sessions properly conducted?

Open the original inquiry pages

K · Campaign relationships and case outcomes

At a glance

Question for investigation

Did political support affect official decisions, or do the full records and comparable cases support an independent explanation?

Open the original inquiry pages

THE FILED PETITION11 AREAS OF INQUIRY

Choose an inquiry

Search the 11 inquiry areas

AREAS OF INQUIRY

GJ–26–2Read the complete
filed petition

06 / How to sign

Signing,simplified.

Check your voter registration, review the petition, and sign the approved paper form in person.

Where to sign

Illustrative scene of people reviewing and signing paperwork at a Grand Jury Justice-branded outdoor information table

The signing process / What to expect

Three steps. A clear next move.

Check eligibility

Only eligible registered Tulsa County voters may sign. Check your status before attending.

Check registration

Meet a petition collector

Review the petition and ask questions at the signing location.

Read the petition

Sign on paper

Use the approved signature sheet in person. The collector can explain the next steps.

Read what you’re signing

Voter registration · Oklahoma

Your voice.
Your next step.

Not sure if you're registered? Start here. Check your voter status or apply to register through Oklahoma’s official voter services.

01 / Check your status

Am I registered?

Find your registration, confirm your county, and review your voter information. Have your name and date of birth ready.

Check my voter registration (opens official OK Voter Portal in a new tab)Official OK Voter Portal · Opens in a new tab

02 / Get registered

Make it official.

Start your voter registration application. Online submission requires an Oklahoma driver license or state ID and a signature on file with Service Oklahoma.

Register to vote now (opens official Oklahoma registration application in a new tab)Prefer mail or in person? See all registration options (opens in a new tab)

Before signing the petition
Confirm your approved Tulsa County voter registration. Submitting a new application does not immediately make you a registered voter.

Your voter information is entered on the official state website.Already registered? Find where to sign

A camera operator filming a public gathering — IN THE PUBLIC EYEThe story deserves
a clear record.

07 / Media & Press

Independent reporting.Original records.

Find original reporting, court documents, and press resources.

Additional reports

Inquiry areas

Petition documents

COMPLETE KIT · ZIPFor the press.Fact sheet, petition documents, and coverage references.Download press kit QUICK REFERENCE · PDF · 2 PAGESThe essential facts.The petition, the process, and the media contact.Download fact sheet

INTERVIEWS & PRESS INQUIRIESinfo@grandjuryjustice.us

405-428-1576

THE MEDIA INDEX

Follow the story to its source.

Original reporting and court documents, with the publisher, date, and direct source link clearly identified.

4 items in the media center

Image published with Oklahoma Watch’s petition reporting

ARTICLE

Independent reporting

October 16, 2026

The petition, the political context, and the response

Independent reporting on the petition and responses from the people involved, including the District Attorney.

Oklahoma Watch

Read at Oklahoma Watch

REPORT

Independent reporting

September 29, 2026

Judicial review of the citizens’ petition

2 News reports on the September 29 review and the amendments requested by the court.

KJRH / 2 News Oklahoma

Read the original report

INTERVIEW

Interview

September 24, 2026

The petitioner’s attorney explains the request

An attorney explains the requested investigation in the linked 2 News report. The interview presents a participant’s perspective.

KJRH / 2 News Oklahoma

Open the interview at 2 News

First page of the court’s September 29 review document

READ PDF

Court filing

September 29, 2026

The court’s September 29 review document

Read the three-page court document linked by 2 News alongside its reporting on the petition’s review.

Court document · hosted by KJRH

Open the court document PDF

08 / Community participation

Faces ofparticipation.

Community conversations and participation at Grand Jury Justice events.

Older attendee holding a yellow sign at a Grand Jury Justice gathering

Two attendees holding handwritten signs at a Grand Jury Justice event

09 / Volunteer

Participationmatters.

Help with signature collection, notarization, events, and approved outreach.

Volunteer Contact Team

Illustrative scene of a volunteer holding a Grand Jury Justice folder while speaking with a resident at her doorway

Ways to help

Read and share the documents.

Filed petition

Petition summary

Eleven areas of inquiry

Download website QR code

Ask the coordinator for the approved collector packet and signature sheets.

10 / Frequently asked questions

Frequentlyasked.

Who can sign the petition?

Registered Tulsa County voters who meet the petition requirements. Verify your registration through the Oklahoma Voter Portal .

Can I sign online?

No. Original handwritten signatures are required by the published process.

Where do I sign?

See the Where to sign above.

Where can I read the filed petition?

Read the petition PDF

11 / Get involved

Public trust requirespublic accountability.

Find a signing location, volunteer, or support the work.

Where to sign Volunteer Donate

Some decisions deserve a formal investigation.

Every signature brings us closer.

Every day counts.

A signature.
A place to begin.

Cellular Repair
& Exchange

Plan your stop.

Your visit

Can’t get there?
Let’s find a way.

The petition in focus.

Eleven questions. A closer look.

The petition. The people. The response.

Hear the concerns behind the petition.

Tulsa DA Steven Kunzweiler

The record comes first.

Full filed petition PDF

Inside the petition.

At a glance

Question for investigation

Signing,simplified.

Three steps. A clear next move.

Check eligibility

Meet a petition collector

Sign on paper

Your voice.
Your next step.

Am I registered?

Make it official.

Independent reporting.Original records.

Follow the story to its source.

The petition, the political context, and the response

Judicial review of the citizens’ petition

The petitioner’s attorney explains the request

The court’s September 29 review document

Faces ofparticipation.

Participationmatters.

Read and share the documents.

Frequentlyasked.

Public trust requirespublic accountability.

Contact the coordinator

Every signature brings us closer.

Every day counts.

A signature.A place to begin.

Cellular Repair& Exchange

Plan your stop.

Your visit

Can’t get there?Let’s find a way.

The petition in focus.

Eleven questions. A closer look.

The petition. The people. The response.

Hear the concerns behind the petition.

Tulsa DA Steven Kunzweiler

The record comes first.

Full filed petition PDF

Inside the petition.

At a glance

Question for investigation

Signing,simplified.

Three steps. A clear next move.

Check eligibility

Meet a petition collector

Sign on paper

Your voice.Your next step.

Am I registered?

Make it official.

Independent reporting.Original records.

Follow the story to its source.

The petition, the political context, and the response

Judicial review of the citizens’ petition

The petitioner’s attorney explains the request

The court’s September 29 review document

Faces ofparticipation.

Participationmatters.

Read and share the documents.

Frequentlyasked.

Public trust requirespublic accountability.

A signature.
A place to begin.

Cellular Repair
& Exchange

Can’t get there?
Let’s find a way.

Your voice.
Your next step.