On July 24, the Connecticut Secretary of State filed this brief in the U.S. Supreme Court in Feehan v Marcone, 18-1470. This case involves the election count for State Representative, 120th district, in November 2018. The Republican nominee, Jim Feehan, lost by 13 votes. But then it was discovered that either 75 or 76 voters had been given the wrong ballot. Even though they lived in the 120th district, they were accidentally given a ballot for the 122nd district.
Feehan asked for a new election, but the state courts said that only the legislature could authorize that. The legislature refused, because it said Feehan had not provided evidence showing that if the 75 or 76 ballots had been counted, he would have won. Feehan returned to the state courts, but they refused any relief, so he filed with the U.S. Supreme Court on May 24. The state asked for more time to respond, but now it has responded. The state says the mistake was just an accident, and therefore nothing in the U.S. Constitution provides any relief to a candidate in this situation.
Will any/all of the SCOTUS olde folks die from laughing at the MORON *accident* defense of the MORON CT SOS ???
BLATANT incompetent violation of 14 AMDT EPC.
How many election forms in each State now with a zillion election areas – many gerrymander concentration camp districts ???
MUST SUE for $$$ damages to bankrupt MORON HACKS.
With the SCOTUS Rucho gerrymander disaster op —
even more *accidents* will be likely – spider, dragon, octopus, ink splot, etc. pack/crack rigged districts.
PR and AppV and TOTSOP
Will the EU and NATO *leaders* have enough brain cells to STOP Putin and his gangsters from subverting the Ukraine regime even more ???
See Putin invaded/occupied tyranny areas — Crimea and eastern Ukraine parts.
See earlier Hitler invaded/occupied tyranny areas — Austria, Czechland – before Poland and WW II.
oops- wrong box. See U PR story.
Had a DEMOCRAT lost that election by 13 votes, the state would have an entirely different view, and there would have to be a revote to make sure the Democrat won. That’s how Democrats play the game.
The registrars in that town are highly trained and very conscientious they used two different color ballots the problem was because the ballots were both the same color and the ballot clerk got the wrong ballots by mistake and did not realize the problem because it was the right color. There are a lot of rules and regulations the poll workers have to follow. I am sorry there is no way we will ever know who would have won if those few ballots were the correct ones. In a race that close I find it hard to believe that they would have all voted the same way.
In the olde days of paper ballots the voters would get multiple ballots for the different offices/issues – esp. for the gerrymander offices.
Now a chore to have precinct based ballots [with ALL offices on one ballot] >>> zillion precinct ballot forms — bit easy to have multiple *accidents*.
The fact is that the main reason CT went to the current paper based tabulator system was the increasing breakdowns and unreliability of the mechanical voting machines that had not been made for 30 years. The added security of a paper based system. along wirh the other security measures taken including not allowing connectivity between tabulators or the internet.
with the inability to yrack or correct machine breakdowns. there was an inherent and accepted error rate. Things are better today, but system failures happen.
by extrapolating the results of the district’s correctly cast ballots, we can see that the vote was extremely close, and we could expect that the results of the improper ballots would have followed the same percentages.
Ther are few options available to election officials other than the defined legislative course, other to discipline the polling place officials and workers who failed to use due diligence
Gson Where is the evidence? It’s just a story told to the court. We are told a man approached a poll worker outside the ballot area and claimed to have gotten the wrong ballot. This man was never identified in any reports and he never testified at the House hearing . So the original complainant is unknown. The person who testified that he was approached by this complainant was Bunnell Polling station Republican Assistant Registrar of Voters, Dave Heriot, he was appointed to that position by Stratford Registrar Decilio. The strange thing is that Heriot is a registered Democrat who lives in Milford , Ct. They couldn’t find any Stratford Republican to take that job? The Bunnell Polling station Democrat Assistant Registrar was actually a Stratford Democrat which makes sense. Lastly after all this time, court hearing, House hearing, and the fact that the name and address of every person who voted that day at Bunnell is known not one person out of a supposed 75 improper ballots given out has stepped up and said I was given the wrong ballot. Also the machine tallies confirmed by the Town Clerk show no overage or underage in either the 120 or 122 districts at Bunnell. Where did those 75 ballots go? Why wasn’t the Town Clerk called to testify she confirms the Registrar’s work product? It just goes to GIGO Garbage In Garbage Out. The voters of Stratford where being feed garbage. I watched the hearings and it was sad to see how the local voting system is run and it is even sadder that The Republican Registrar is a fraud
Your 100 percent correct. The 76 or 75 has not been proven. If you match up each ballot from the polling place the 122 would have had 75 or 76 over. Sounds like your town is a bunch of political scumbags. And the establishment can’t be touched.
The paperwork certified by the town even proves it.
Suspicious Fact 1) The only person to complain about the ballot was a senior citizen that Jim Feehan gave a ride to the polls.
Suspicious Fact 2) The 16 year old female Bunnell student that didn’t check the ballots before she handed them out was hired by the Republican Registrar of Voters. During the hearings it was said that she would not be held responsible.
Suspicious Fact 3) The number keeps changing between 75 & 76 so they can’t even keep their distorted facts correct.
Suspicious Fact 4) The Republican ROV had at the time of the election (and still has) an active complaint for voter fraud against him with the SEEC.
Suspicious Fact 5) The Stratford PD decided to arrest 2 Democrat voters from Bridgeport prior to the 2017 Mayoral election that had no impact on the election but they decided to prove their loyalty to the out going mayor in an effort to sway the election just like Trump did with the fake Clinton emails. Yet this same department did not prosecute the R-ROV and the Town Clerk for allowing SHA Chairman Tom Malloy (a cousin of the former governor) to vote 3 times by absentee ballot in Stratford when he had established residency in Woodbury per DMV records.
Suspicious Fact 6) There is no concrete evidence that Jim Feehan actually lived in the district he ran in. According to the Town Clerk he still owns a house in the 122nd District and owns no property in the 120th District.
Suspicious Fact 7) The Republicans over 40 years ago gerrymandered the 120th House District and the 21st Senate District so that they could never lose them. Yet after 40 years of nothing the voters finally spoke and voted out the R in the 120th and the R in the 21st lost but was carried by the other towns. Also the Probate Judge that was Republican controlled for 60 years was also flipped so they needed something to stir the pot to get the seat back, hence the Bunnell 75 or 76.
Why doesn’t anyone want to believe these facts?
http://stratfordtaxpayersforbettergovernment.blogspot.com/2017/12/state-elections-enforcement-commission.html
Mr Winger it would be interesting to read your take on this Ct SEEC case 2017-087. The above link has the complaint filing.