RCW 29A.68.090
Illegal votes -- Allegation of.
When the reception of illegal votes is alleged as a cause of contest, it is sufficient to state generally that illegal votes were cast, that, if given to the person whose election is contested in the specified precinct or precincts, will, if taken from that person, reduce the number of the person's legal votes below the number of legal votes given to some other person for the same office.
OKAY HERE IT IS.....
'...it is sufficient to state generally...'
and here's some math:
a = number of illegal votes for Gregoire
b = number of illegal votes for Rossi
a + b = 1000
X= total votes for Gregoire
Y= total votes for Rossi
X = Y +129
Delete the illegal votes
(X-a)-(Y-b) < 1 for Gregoire to become Gregone,
some algebra yields:
a > 564, or 564 of 1000 (56.4%) illegal votes went for Gregone.
This percentage is highly highly highly likely in King County.
The general formula is to show a > (N+128)/2 where N = the number of illegal votes.
Now the case will hinge on statistics or confirmed votes. The latter is not possible because of privacy.
If the statistical approach is turned down, it means no election cold ever be contested because of ballot privacy, i.e. no election would ever be contested.
Now the lawyers should have case law to back up a statistical approach or a 'general irregularities' decision. This is where the election will be decided.
I was thinking last night the Reps should do surveys of "who would you vote for" in State prison. I bet they go Dem at a huge rate.