Site Map
Voting News
Contact Us
About Us

is NOT!
associated with

Ohio Vote Fraud Battle Heats Up
By Katherine Yurica
Dec 13, 2004, 15:56

 Links to A New Affidavit From a Professional Willing to Testify
And Prima Facie Evidence of Fraud

Today Congressman John Conyers, Ranking Member, Committee on the Judiciary and Dean, Congressional Black Caucus, will hold a congressional forum in Columbus, Ohio concerning new evidence of election irregularities and fraud in Ohio.

 The Congressional forum will discuss the moral issue of Ohio electors meeting while recounts and litigation are pending. They will raise the question, ?How can any group of electors in good conscience meet and decide the outcome of the election before the votes are counted?? This is a moral issue. And the Rev. Jesse Jackson will be at the Columbus forum to call America back to its roots and to the sanctity of the right to vote and to the necessity to have one?s vote counted accurately.


If the Rev. Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson and other leaders of the Dominionist movement tell Americans that it is all right for Mr. Bush to take the oath of office even if he is not the duly elected president-elect, then Americans have lost their spiritual and moral compass beyond anything any of us could imagine. For one thing, it dooms Mr. Bush to a cloud of suspicion. Republicans ought more than anyone to insist that all the votes be counted.


The forum will convene at 10:30 a.m. (Ohio time). New evidence will be brought forward and legislative responses to the crisis will be discussed at the forum, which will be televised over C-Span.


One possible piece of new evidence is the Affidavit of Richard Hayes Phillips, which shows Kerry could win the presidency. Dr. Phillips, a PhD well versed in standard techniques of statistical analysis, testifies that in his professional opinion, ?John Kerry?s margins of victory were wrongly reduced by 22,000 votes in Cleveland, by 17,000 votes in Columbus, and by as many as 7,000 votes in Toledo. It is my further professional opinion, that John Kerry?s margins of defeat in Warren, Butler, and Clermont counties were inflated by as many as 37,000 votes in the aggregate?? As Dr. Phillips analyzes each county and ward, Mr. Bush?s lead in Ohio begins to look as if it is based on smoke and mirrors, often resting on incorrect presidential vote tallies.


At the same time John Conyer?s forum meets and examines new evidence, John Bonifaz, General Counsel for the National Voting Rights Institute is said to be filing a complaint before the Ohio State Supreme Court, requesting the Court to declare John Kerry the winner of the election in Ohio, based upon new evidence that fraud has indeed occurred. Injunctive Relief will undoubtedly be sought and the case will be heard in a Court of Equity. This legal maneuver is brilliant because when the courts decide a case in Equity, they wear a different hat than they do in Courts of Law. In its most general meaning, the term, according to Black?s Law Dictionary, ?denotes the spirit and the habit of fairness, justness, and right dealing? that should regulate man?s dealings with others. What American dare proclaim that it?s fair and just to steal the votes away from African Americans or students? Courts of Equity are moral courts who lay down moral justness. It is almost the Golden Rule: ?the rule of doing to all others as we desire them to do to us.?  A Court of Equity is a synonym for justice. It belongs in the sphere of morals and in the precepts of conscience. And those precepts belong in the hearts and minds of every citizen in this nation who call themselves ?Christians.?


The significance, of course, is that all Americans will be watching a court case based on moral grounds. The Republicans, who are opposing the recount and any attempt at fairness, will be facing a higher morality than their own. One side will be asking the court to be fair to all citizensthe other side will be forced to argue the court should not be fair and just. It won't be quite that simple, but it always helps to be wearing a white hat and one does that when one argues against fraud!


According to Ray Beckman, a lawyer who is deeply involved in fighting election fraud, the Ohio recount team assigned to Greene County were in process of recording voting information from minority precincts, when they were stopped in mid-count by a surprise order from Secretary of State Blackwell?s office that made all voter records for the state of Ohio, private and no longer considered ?public records.?  According to Beckman, ?the Ohio Revised Code Title XXXV, Elections, Sec. 3503.26, requires all election records to be made available for public inspection and copying.? Beckman said, ?ORC Sec. 3599.161 makes it a crime for any employee of the Board of Elections to knowingly prevent or prohibit any person from inspecting the public records filed in the office of the Board of Elections.? Perhaps even more significantly, Beckman said, ?ORC Sec. 3599.42 clearly states: ?A violation of any provision of Title XXXV (35) of the Revised Code constitutes a prima facie case of election fraud within the purview of such Title.??


To understand the significance of Ray Beckman?s analysis, one must understand what a ?prima facie case? is. Black?s Law Dictionary says a prima facie case is one that ?will suffice until contradicted and overcome by other evidence.? But that definition doesn?t quite tell us what?s involved. Black?s goes on to say: ?A litigating party is said to have a prima facie case when the evidence in his favor is sufficiently strong for his opponent to be called on to answer it.? But consider this: ?a grand jury is bound to find a true bill of indictment, if the evidence before them creates a prima facie case against the accused.? It isn?t necessary for a grand jury to hear the evidence for the defense, once a prima facie case has been established.


When Kenneth Blackwell appeared for his interview with MSNBC's Keith Olbermann saying he would not interfere with the recount, (see Lisa Rein?s Radar)  Olbermann said: ?As it plays into the recount though sir, are you saying that your office does not anticipate taking any steps to try to prevent a recount in Ohio??

Blackwell: ?No. We haven't! We've told the two officials candidates that once we certify on December 6th, they have five days to certify. I mean, to ask for a recount. Once they ask for a recount, we will provide them with a recount. And that's what I've said from the very first indication that they were interested in a recount. Once it was established that they were statewide candidates with standing, our law says that they can ask for a recount. We will regard this as yet another audit of the voting process. The reason it takes us from November the second to December the sixth to certify is because we have a very tedious, very comprehensive process where we audit by precinct, across the state, every vote that was cast to make sure that every vote that was legally cast is counted.? (see Lisa Rein?s Radar)

Mr. Blackwell, at the very least raises questions about his truthfulness and integrity. Scott Peck in his book, The People of the Lie, tells us that lying is both a cause of evil and the result of evil. It?s time the American press and the American people wake up. What is at stake is the future of our country as a land of the people, by the people and for the people?a land where citizens can trust officials to count votes honestly!

The Ohio recount is not evidence of a ?conspiracy theory.? It is evidence of a travesty of justice and fairness.

Another lawsuit that was filed in the federal court by Audrey J. Schering against J. Kenneth Blackwell, became a little larger when the Ohio Democratic Party intervened as a plaintiff in the case. This means that after studying the facts, the Ohio Democratic Party believed that its participation in the lawsuit was necessary in order to seek declaratory and injunctive relief from the Federal Courts based largely on the case, Bush v. Gore (2000), 531 U.S. 98. The complaint alleges that Kenneth Blackwell failed in his mandatory statutory duty (R.C. ? 3501.05), to provide directives to each of the eighty-eight (88) county Boards of Elections in Ohio to assure uniform and consistent counting of the provisional ballots. The complaint raises the issue of the U.S. Constitution?s requirement of equal protection of the laws. And the complaint alleges that uniform standards, procedures and rules for the counting of provisional ballots must be required as they were in Bush v. Gore.  Otherwise, Mr. Blackwell violated the Equal Protection of the Constitution of the United States. This complaint was filed by Donald J. McTigue, Trial Attorney from Columbus, Ohio.

All across America, Americans are demonstrating against fraud in our elections. They are marching, carrying candles in the dark. They are praying and they are reaching out to the discouraged and those who feel shocked at the hooliganism that has taken over and stripped the decency away from Americans who once held decency dear. Hooligans, if they could see themselves, are naked and their words like vomit on the altars of the churches. Yes, you can win an election by stealing it, but you?ll never be able to look at yourself in the mirror and respect the bloated coercive spirit behind the facile smile that stares back at you. If you were trusted with the sacred votes of trusting Americans and you embezzled them, ?flipped? them as some call it, or stuffed the boxes, you are a moral disgrace, a sick and perverted individual. May God have mercy on your soul.

Previous Page

Election Problem Log image
2004 to 2009


Accessibility Issues
Accessibility Issues

Cost Comparisons
Cost Comparisons

Flyers & Handouts

VotersUnite News Exclusives

Search by

Copyright © 2004-2010 VotersUnite!