7A-66 Removal affidavit submitted by Janet Loving-Pitts

IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE				State of North CarolinaSUPIOROR COURT DIVISION					        County of Dare
IN THE MATTER OF THE REMOVAL OF: JEFFREY CRUDEN, District attorney of the 1st prosecutorial district in North CarolinaAFFIDAVIT PURSUANT TO N.C. Gen. Stat.§ 7A-66

My name is Janet Loving-Pitts.2.	I live in XXXXXXX County, Virginia and I am over the age of 18 and competent to testify. 3.	My address is  XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX.

Jeffrey Cruden is currently the elected District Attorney for the 1st Prosecutorial District in North Carolina. 

I have known Melissa Nicholson since she was born.

On August 9th, 2025, I attended a peaceful protest with Melissa Nicholoson and other supporters in the Outer Banks, North Carolina to support survivors of sexual assault. 

After the protest, I, along with other supporters sent out flyers with concerns about how Jeffrey Cruden is handling sexual assault cases. 

This flyer referenced how Melissa Nicholson’s case was handled by DA Jeffrey Cruden.

This flyer referred to Melissa Nicholson as Survivor X.

The flyer included actual copies of emails Melissa Nicholson sent to Dare County asking to speak with the DA and provide critical evidence in her case.

I have read the statement that Jeffrey Cruden sent out to multiple people in response to the flyer that was sent out. 

One of the people who received this statement from DA Jeffrey Cruden was Teresa Pullin. 

I know Teresa Pullin from the August 9th protest. 

The statement DA Cruden wrote to Teresa Pullin included details of Melissa Nicholson’s case.

His statement makes comments about Melissa Nicholson’s credibility as a reporting witness. 

I have personal knowledge and can verify that statements made by DA Jeffrey Cruden about Melissa Nicholson in his emails were false.

I believe that DA Jeffrey Cruden publicly distributed these false statements about Melissa Nicholson in an attempt to discredit her.

Publicly discrediting a reporting witness or victim of a sexual assault is a violation of the North Carolina Code of professional Ethics, a violation of the National Prosecution Standards, and a violation of Marsy’s Law where victims are to be treated with dignity and respect. 

I believe his actions in this case mandate him to be removed from office via. N.C.G.S.§  7A-66 for willful misconduct and conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice that brings the office into disrepute. 

Prior cases of 7a-66 removal proceedings have removed DA’s in North Carolina for making false statements (2012), making derogatory statements (1995) and violating Marsy’s Law with respect to victim rights (2021). 

Thus, DA Cruden’s actions in distributing publicly false statements of fact about a victim of a sexual assault would qualify DA Cruden from removal from office for such behavior. 

In the past, DA Spivey was removed from office for a single incident of making highly offensive comments while off duty to a patron at a bar. Thus, multiple instances of sending out false, defamatory, hurtful statements about a victim of sexual assault which violates a known ethical code of conduct while on duty should definitely qualify for removal. 

For this reason, I feel like DA Cruden should be removed from office. 

Furthermore, this proceeding is usually handled by the senior resident superior court judge, who in this case would be Judge Andy Womble. 

However, Andy Womble was the district attorney of the 1st prosecutorial district in office from 2015 till he was elected as superior court judge in 2022. 

During this time, Jeffrey Cruden was an assistant district attorney in the 1st prosecutorial district and worked for Andy Womble. 

It is requested that Judge Womble humbly recuse himself from this proceeding to eliminate any real or perceived bias in his handling of this proceeding due to his close relationship with DA Cruden.