Podcaster takes the witness stand

SANDUSKY — A local podcaster on trial on allegations she forged a name on federal loan documents took the witness stand Thursday. In her testimony, she claimed the signatures are real and not forged at all. The podcaster, Ashli Ford, 41, of Milan, faces 12 felony charges, including tampering with records, forgery, aggravated theft and identity fraud in the Erie County Common Pleas Court with Judge Beverly McGookey presiding over the case. The case involves allegations that Ford signed a co-signer's name — that of a male victim who previously testified this week — on federal loan documents without his consent and that she had falsely stated a familial relationship in the documents. She then allegedly used the funds secured in the loan to dismiss a home foreclosure action and modify the loan. State rests its case Before Ford's testimony began, the prosecution — led by Erie County prosecutor Kevin Baxter — had to call its final witness. Baxter called John Nolder, an investigator for the Erie County Prosecutor's Office, to the stand. During Nolder's testimony, he stated that the case first came to his attention through the office's civil division — learning that the documents which involved the alleged co-signer's signature appeared suspicious — and that he was asked to investigate. As part of his investigation, Nolder sent subpoenas to the financial institutions involved, including the mortgage lender and, later, Ford, requesting that they provide any documents. During that investigation, Nolder testified that his agency extracted information from Ford's phone and that the agency had reason to suspect certain text messages were missing. When Ford was subpoenaed, she was given the option to either testify in front of the grand jury or provide the prosecutor's office with any and all documents she had that proved that the alleged victim did, in fact, sign the documents in question. Ford ultimately submitted a 79-page response, including a timeline of her relationship with the victim and screenshots of texts to support her claim that the victim signed the documents and that they were not forged. On cross-examination, defense attorney Peter Pattakos reviewed the response with Nolder, who confirmed that the overall timeline was accurate, but Nolder stated that the victim has consistently denied ever signing the documents. Pattakos suggested there was no evidence that Ford intentionally attempted to defraud the bank, the mortgage lender or the victim. The state then rested its case, and Pattakos asked the judge to dismiss Ford's charges, arguing that there is no evidence that she intentionally defrauded anyone. McGookey denied the request. Now the defense's turn, Pattakos called Ford herself to the witness stand. Ford denies victim's claims Ahead of her testimony Thursday, Ford filed a request with the court seeking to prohibit her testimony from being recorded by reporters in the courtroom, and that she could not be photographed during her testimony. McGookey granted that request, and granted similar requests from two prosecution witnesses. Ford took her time on the stand to attempt to discredit the victim, stating that he did, in fact, sign the documents himself and that she did not forge his signature. "Unfortunately, that is standard for (the victim)," Ford said. The nature of the signature was a point of focus in Wednesday's testimony, with a handwriting analyst called to the stand by prosecutors. That witness noted differences between a real sample of the victim's signature and the allegedly forged signature, but stated they could not say one way or the other if it came from two different people. During Ford's testimony, she claimed that she was an authorized user on the mortgage account and had permission from the victim to change the contact information to hers because she was the one paying the mortgage. When Baxter inquired, why, if she truly had permission as an authorized user to access the account, she would introduce herself using the victim's name and personal information during phone calls with the mortgage company instead of using her own name. Ford claimed that when you call to check on the account, it asks for the borrower's name, which in her case would be the victim. Baxter proceeded to question Ford about the summary of her calls to the mortgage lender. She said that she couldn't confirm the information listed in the summary, guessing that the person on the other end of the phone line could have misheard her. Ford added that she could not confirm what she said on the call without hearing a recording of it. No recording was played in the court. Baxter also questioned Ford on testimony from Wednesday, when Laura Barrett-Bache, the notary public who notarized the documents in question, testified that she was present when Ford signed the documents but did not witness the alleged victim co-sign the papers — an act which goes against typical protocol for notaries. Ford sought to discredit Barrett-Bache and stated her testimony about the victim not being present during the document signing was untrue. Moving toward trial's conclusion The defense rested its case without calling any additional witnesses Thursday afternoon. Judge McGookey let the jury depart before 5 p.m. Both attorneys were expected to give their closing statements Friday morning. The case will then be handed off to 12 jurors to deliberate.