Oklahoma Grand Jury Exposes 'Rank Political Favoritism' in Early Release of Governor Stitt’s Friend After DUI Crash

The Oklahoma grand jury’s damning report lays bare a disturbing pattern of political favoritism that allowed Sara Polston, a close friend of Governor Kevin Stitt, to be released early from prison after a DUI crash that gravely injured a 20-year-old woman. While the jury found no criminal wrongdoing, it condemned the “rank political favoritism” and systemic breakdowns that compromised the integrity of the state’s corrections system.

In 2023, Polston was caught driving with a blood alcohol content nearly twice the legal limit at 66 mph in a 25 mph zone when she collided with another vehicle, seriously injuring Micaela Borrego. Polston received a sentence of eight years in prison plus seven years probation but was out after just 73 days under the Department of Corrections’ GPS monitoring program designed for non-violent offenders.

The grand jury uncovered that Stitt personally intervened by calling the interim director of the Oklahoma Department of Corrections, not only discussing Polston’s pre-sentence process but also prompting staff to “ensure Polston was treated with respect and made to feel comfortable.” The report notes that although no explicit instructions to be lenient were given, the message was clear enough that the officer conducting Polston’s pre-sentence investigation felt pressured to recommend a lighter sentence or risk his job.

Further favoritism extended to Polston’s jail time, where then-Sheriff Chris Amason—later resigned amid embezzlement charges—provided her with “unprecedented” accommodations, including multiple cell moves for comfort, a tablet, and meals from Chick-Fil-A brought by her husband.

Phone records reveal that Polston and her husband, Rod Polston, an attorney and Stitt campaign donor, referred to Stitt by nicknames like “The Guy” or “Our Buddy” who was working behind the scenes to secure a pardon or parole. The grand jury concluded these coded references were to Governor Stitt himself, who openly admitted to a close personal friendship with the Polstons and acknowledged their nearly $30,000 in campaign contributions.

Despite the severity of Polston’s crime and the victim’s family’s opposition, the Department of Corrections failed to notify Micaela Borrego or her relatives during the GPS release approval process. Stitt made additional calls to confirm Polston’s early release, actions the grand jury described as being “on behalf of the Polstons,” though Stitt dismissed the report as “political gossip.”

The grand jury’s investigation also highlights broader systemic issues: vague state laws governing the GPS program grant excessive discretion to undertrained DOC administrators, creating ripe conditions for abuse. While the legislature has since passed Senate Bill 137 to bar anyone causing great bodily injury while DUI from the GPS program, Stitt’s refusal to sign the bill into law—allowing it to become law without his signature—illustrates ongoing political maneuvering.

This case shines a harsh light on how political connections and favoritism can corrupt justice and endanger victims, eroding public trust in the rule of law. The Oklahoma grand jury’s report is a stark reminder that accountability must extend beyond criminal charges to dismantle the systemic failures enabling such abuses.

We will keep tracking these abuses of power and the erosion of justice that follow when loyalty trumps law.