COLUMBUS, Ohio — State Rep. Elliot Forhan, who has been battling a civil stalking protection order from his colleague, was just "exonerated" by a Cleveland court, which said the case had no merit and has denied the request.
State. Rep. Juanita Brent (D-Cleveland) failed to prove that Forhan (D-South Euclid) knowingly engaged in a pattern of conduct that caused her to believe that she would be physically harmed or caused mental distress, according to Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Magistrate John Dyke.
"Mr. Forhan is not perfect by any means, but who amongst us is perfect," Dyke wrote.
RELATED: Ohio Rep. Elliot Forhan’s ‘abusive behavior’ warranted punishment, state found
Forhan has faced controversy since House leadership stripped him of nearly all his privileges due to allegations of “abusive” and “violent” behavior — and the "pattern of harassment, hostility, and intimidation of colleagues and staff." This was detailed in a 19-page dossier first reported by us.
The same day as the trial, an internal investigation done by the Ohio Attorney General's office came out saying Forhan deserved the legislative punishments he received.
But when it comes to the civil matter, Dyke sided with Forhan, not just denying this request to continue the protecting order but also vacating the previously granted court order.
"I feel very vindicated today by the court's opinion, but the fact remains, Morgan — there's been a lot of damage done," Forhan told me in an exclusive interview.
Brent also sat down with me to give her first interview about this situation.
"Regardless of what the magistrate came to the conclusion with, I know for sure that I did not feel safe or secure around Representative Elliott Forhan," Brent said.
"Do you still feel unsafe?" I asked.
"I still feel that way," she answered.
Recap
Brent filed and received a protection order against Forhan after numerous incidents of harassment, she said, including several videos made about her and showing up at her home in June.
"I love you," Forhan can be heard saying to Brent in a now-deleted, yet saved by us, TikTok video.
We have been reporting on Forhan's situation from the beginning. Click here to read more in-depth about the allegations, how they started and the timeline of events.
Brent also filed a police report after Forhan allegedly came to her house after the restraining order was filed. Forhan denied this, saying he only went to Brent's home once in the summer.
RELATED: Stalking charges not being filed against Rep. Elliot Forhan due to lack of evidence
On Friday, the pair were in court.
"She's testified that she changed her routine, she asked her coworkers to accompany her to her vehicle, she accepted security when it was offered to her and she tried to stay away from the respondent," said Brent's attorney, Melissa Kelly, according to court transcripts obtained by us. "And changes in routine are absolutely understood in Ohio law to be evidence of mental distress."
Forhan, an attorney, represented himself during the trial. He never meant to scare her or anyone else, he said.
"I've been hurt by the reaction to my apologies. People might think that they're weird or awkward. People might think that I'm weird or awkward. It's hurtful, but — maybe I am a little odd, but I did not engage in any pattern of conduct to knowingly cause anyone to believe that I would cause them physical harm or mental distress," Forhan said in closing statements.
The representative told us that he believes he is autistic, which is why he may struggle with social situations.
Forhan also said that the protection order is based on nothing.
In Brent's police report, an officer documented that Brent accused Forhan of coming to her home on Nov. 20 and dropping off a letter for her. She claimed to have this on video surveillance.
Then, on Nov. 21, Brent alleged that her personal security detail — not city law enforcement — saw a truck drive down her street. The vehicle slowed to a crawl near Brent's address and noticed the security, according to the document of the lawmaker's recollection. The driver "resembled" Forhan, according to the security detail. The truck left and did not return, according to the report.
Forhan has adamantly denied these allegations since they came out — sharing he does not even own a truck. He has also asked for Brent to publish the video and letter since he says he knows they don't exist.
I had tried for months to get this information, and so did Cleveland police.
"Officers asked for but ultimately never received a copy of the referenced letter nor a copy of the referenced video," the city told me.
In discovery documents obtained by us, Brent's legal team could not provide evidence.
Originally, the team wrote, "Petitioner is in the process of downloading surveillance videos and will produce responsive video at a later date," but in the supplemental document, the answer changed to "After a diligent investigation, none."
Brent addressed this during the interview, saying she was never the one who said there was a note or video. When asked if the police miswrote, she said no — it was just someone else who said it.
The ruling
In a sympathetic statement to Forhan, the magistrate paints the representative as a misunderstood but well-meaning man.
"He made some mistakes but he apologized for them, repeatedly," the decision states.
He brought up several key moments from the trial that helped make his decision.
Visit to Brent's home
Forhan visited Brent's home in June, as he was door-knocking for a campaign and also wanted to mend their strained relationship.
"I was going there to pay my respects to a party leader and to ask her what I can do to make things right between us because it seemed to me like something was wrong," Forhan said in an exclusive interview with us in December.
That wasn't the way the AG's office saw it.
"He banged on her front door and yelled through the glass to the cousin (Yolanda Bayless) that he was Elliot Forhan and he worked with Rep. Brent," the investigation reported. "He did not park at Rep. Brent’s house, instead parking down the street and walking to her house, which prompted another neighbor to also reach out to Rep. Brent to ensure she was safe, because it was so unusual for a White male to be walking through the neighborhood and approaching Rep. Brent’s house after dark."
Dyke saw it from Forhan's perspective, saying Brent didn't even know about this until after the fact because she wasn't home.
"He simply wanted to talk to his colleague and so he came over unannounced, knocked on a door and left after two minutes having learned she was not at home," he wrote. "Although Ms. Brent and Ms. Bayless used the buzzwords of 'fearful,' 'emotional' and 'afraid' in an effort to convince the court for the need for a protection order, the court remains unpersuaded."
Brent immediately reported this to House leadership, and a meeting between leaders Brent and Forhan was held the following day. According to Russo, Forhan was defensive and did not understand the consequences of his actions. However, Forhan said he tried to apologize.
"This meeting between House members does not sway the court in any way in favor of granting a protection order," Dyke said. "It is largely an innocuous meeting to discuss an innocuous event."
It wasn't innocuous because she had already told Forhan repeatedly she didn't want to speak with him, she said.
"There was no type of justification for him to show up to my home in the evening — that is not safe at all for someone to unexpectedly show up to a colleague's home, banging at their door for no apparent reason," Brent told me.
The magistrate, a white man, cannot tell a woman how to feel about someone coming to their home, she argued.
"If you tell somebody you don't want to be around them and they decide to show up to your home — that is wrong," Brent told me. "I don't care what this court says, that is wrong."
Forhan's heated run-ins with a constituent and a fellow lawmaker
The trouble all started back in May when Cleveland Heights salon owner Ladosha Wright traveled down to the Statehouse. She opposed legislation that Forhan cosponsored, which resulted in a verbal altercation following the hearing, one that Brent witnessed.
Since then, Wright and Forhan have made up and actually developed a friendship, both have told me.
"Ms. Brent testified that Mr. Forhan’s tone was 'off-putting and aggressive' and he had 'put his hand in front of her face.' Ms. Brent was fearful for her," the Dyke wrote.
In November, Forhan allegedly screamed about the Israel-Hamas war at state Rep. Munira Abdullahi, who is Black and Muslim, alone in a committee room to the point that she was "visibly shaken," and the House Sergeant-At-Arms was called and dispatched to stand outside of where Forhan was — because they believed he would become violent.
Brent was a bystander to both, and thus, this doesn't help the case of obtaining a protection order for herself.
"There was no testimony that Mr. Forhan threatened or addressed Ms. Brent in any aggressive manner. In addition, Ms. Brent did not testify that she was fearful for herself. This whole event amounts to nothing," Dyke continued.
Picture together
The magistrate cast doubt on whether Brent was legitimately afraid of Forhan. His evidence came from a picture of the two of them smiling and posing together from September.
"One does not normally take a photo with one’s stalker, someone you are afraid of, someone who is causing you physical harm or mental distress," Dyke wrote. "A picture can be worth a thousand words. Here, it is quite telling."
Brent testified that she was being polite when she took the photo. The magistrate said, "She could also have politely refused."
"There are people who are culturally and gender-based competent to be able to deal with something like that," Brent said. "I don't walk around with security, I walk around by myself. You can't tell someone who is at a public event that you would not take pictures — as a public official."
Dyke was thinking about this situation from his own lens, she said.
"That is a person's bias being put into this, of how they would feel about something — when this is how I feel," she added.
Videos
Brent was "unnerved,” and uncomfortable by the videos Forhan made of her, apologizing for making her feel alarmed or disappointed in him.
"Before posting the apology videos, Mr. Forhan showed them to his mother, Linn Forhan, who testified in court that she urged him to delete them for fear that they might be misconstrued," Dyke wrote. "The court believes that is exactly what happened."
He then goes on to question Brent's emotions, saying that she was "misconstruing" the videos — as Forhan "expressed remorse and essentially asked for forgiveness."
"The court is unconvinced that Ms. Brent was “unnerved,” “uncomfortable” and “alarmed” by the apology videos," he wrote.
About saying I love you?
"At first blush, it might be “off-putting” that a colleague says he loves you, but when properly put in context, it is a term of respect and admiration, nothing more," Dyke added. "These videos do not support a finding of menacing by stalking."
This also has a biased slant, Brent said, adding that the videos were creepy.
"I don't go around telling my colleagues that I love them," Brent said. "I work in a very professional setting, one of the most professional settings in the state."
Brent's best friend and witness
The magistrate had a major problem with Brent's witness, Mallory McMaster. He said his hatred for Forhan was "palpable" and that she was willing to say or do anything in support of her friend.
"This one-two combination made for a very, very biased witness who was willing to stretch the truth and exaggerate for effect in court," Dyke wrote. "She showed her true motives when she testified that she wanted Mr. Forhan removed from his state job and removed from the Democratic Party."
The court is "dubious" of her entire testimony and "gives no credence to her" — especially because of her comment of violence to Forhan.
"The court notes that the most disturbing thing that happened in the entire case was not even done by Mr. Forhan, but by Ms. McMaster, when she testified, in open court, under oath, that she wanted to 'shoot' Mr. Forhan," the magistrate wrote. "This is far worse than anything that Mr. Forhan did or said to Ms. Brent in this entire case."
McMaster told me she has a very simple response for Dyke: "The system hates women."
"The justice system fails victims every step of the way. Our punishment-focused society often forgets about victims and protects abusers. Elliot Forhan is far from the only man who got away with behavior that made women beg the system for help. Examples like these are why it's so hard for women to speak up. As our society becomes more polarized and we grow more isolated, we have to find ways to build new systems that shut down intolerable behavior and protect people effectively and quickly," she said in a statement.
Now, Forhan said he is afraid for his safety.
"McMaster wants to shoot me," he said. "It's very disturbing, and I have been in communication with law enforcement."
Moving on for Forhan
"It's hard to imagine going back to normal after this," Forhan said, exasperated.
He has work to do to repair his image, get fees for his legal troubles and potentially fight against the "false police report" and "defamation" by Russo and her chief of staff.
The whole thing is a "political hatchet job" meant to make him lose his primary, he said. Whether that is true or not, he did lose his reelection. Forhan lost his reelection attempt, getting 12% of the vote, versus his two competitors, who got 45 and 42%. Beachwood City Councilmember Eric Synenberg will be the next representative for House District 21.
"As a lawyer, I feel proud that the correct and just outcome was reached," Forhan continued. "As a person, I'm sorry that it had to put my family and me through nearly five months of unnecessary suffering."
As of his career?
"I do plan to serve out my term proudly and to the best of my ability to make the most of the time that I still have in this position," he said.
He just wants to represent his constituents and work as normal — but the road ahead is long.
"I'm hopeful that it is not the end for me in politics," he said.
Moving on for Brent
She wants to bring something good out of this bad situation, Brent said.
"I hope I can be able to use this experience so I can be able to serve people across the state who do feel like they've been a victim of violence or the victim of stalking or menacing," she added. "You have a voice here at the Statehouse."
She is looking into ways to make the process easier for victims of domestic violence in getting protection orders and making the system easier to navigate for survivors.
The lawmaker also has advice for people who find themselves in a similar situation:
"Just because the verdict did not go the way you want it to go does not mean that you are wrong with your feelings."
As for Forhan?
If Representative Forhan never knew this before, he should know this now to stay away from me," she said. "His presence, his actions, his demeanor have made me feel uncomfortable and unsafe for a long time — I don't need a court order to decide on how I feel."
House leadership did not have a comment at this time.
Follow WEWS statehouse reporter Morgan Trau on Twitter and Facebook.
