Posted on 05/27/2005 8:26:29 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
WENATCHEE, Wash. - A judge Friday refused to throw out a Republican challenge to the election of Democratic Gov. Christine Gregoire, saying voters deserve a full accounting of how the balloting was conducted.
The Democrats asked for a dismissal after the Republicans rested their case following four days of testimony aimed at proving that errors, illegal votes and fraud combined to deprive GOP candidate Dino Rossi of victory last fall.
The Republicans are asking Superior Court Judge John Bridges to nullify Gregoire's 129-vote victory and open the way for Rossi to be declared the winner or a new election held. The margin was the smallest of any governor's contest in U.S. history.
"Both sides deserve a full and complete analysis," Bridges said in allowing the trial to go forward with the Democrats presenting their side.
In arguing for a dismissal, Democratic attorney Kevin Hamilton said the GOP had "failed to introduce anything resembling clear and convincing evidence" that the election was invalid.
GOP attorney Harry Korrell argued that there was "overwhelming evidence of error and neglect."
Whatever the outcome, the case is all but certain to be appealed to the state Supreme Court.
The GOP focused its challenge on the Democratic stronghold of King County, the state's largest, where election officials have acknowledged errors in tracking and counting ballots.
Republican attorneys said Friday they had identified 2,820 invalid votes that were counted, mostly in King County: 789 felon, dead and double voters, 1,156 votes in excess of voters credited at the polls, and 875 votes in excess of voters credited with absentee voting.
Democrats countered by calling auditors from across the state to testify about similar election errors. Officials from eight counties that voted for Rossi and one that was evenly split all testified about mistakes they'd made during the 2004 election. Altogether, they acknowledged counting 959 questionable votes.
Democratic attorney Hamilton said the testimony showed "there is no such thing as a perfect election ... There are always lots of little mistakes. That doesn't invalidate an election."
Republicans said the election errors presented Friday strengthen their arguments.
"They're certainly making our case that the problems in this election were so serious that outside of God, there's probably no one else who knows who got more legal votes," GOP attorney Mark Braden said.
___
On the Net:
Video of the trial: http://www.tvw.org
"Democratic attorney Hamilton said the testimony showed "there is no such thing as a perfect election ... There are always lots of little mistakes. That doesn't invalidate an election.""
LOL!!!!!!!!!!
Isn't this opposite to what they said in FLA 2000?
I wonder if this is Joe Friday's brother.
Isn't this opposite to what they said in FLA 2000?
Exactly the opposite !
COUNT EVERY VOTE!!! :)
No, but clear and overwhelming evidence of systematic fraud does.
Count every vote if we're losing, stop counting if we're winning.
Isn't it funny how they keep recounting until they win and then they declare it is over.
Do-over! Do-over! Okay, I win!
Just how old are these democrats, anyway?
“Democratic attorney Hamilton said the testimony showed "there is no such thing as a perfect election ... There are always lots of little mistakes. That doesn't invalidate an election…”
The democrats took advantage of these “little mistake” by asking for recounts that could manipulate the total vote count, and manipulating vote totals DOES MAKE AN ELECTION INVALID.
Holtz
JeffersonRepublic.com
Thread bookmarked: Buddy B
R O T F L M A O
Perhaps not--when the margin of victory clearly exceeds the margin of error. However, when the margin of victory is 129 votes, then the extent of the errors that both sides agree ocurred is well more than enough to invalidate the election.
I'd guess he's talking about the first count of the votes as being the closest or smallest margin; the one where Rossi won.
I think it is pretty standard for one side to ask for a dismissal after the first side has presented their case. And it is rarely granted. So I wouldn't take undue hope from this.
Let's see 2,820 documented invalid votes from King County versus 959 "questionable" votes from the rest of the state. Isn't it just moral equivalence? < / sarcasm>
Yep, it's SOP.
And if a defense lawyer didn't ask for a dismissal after the state or plaintiff rests, he'd likely be disbarred (ok, scolded) for incompetence.
Count every vote if we're losing, stop counting if we're winning.
That's politics nowadays.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.