Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Impounding the Machines- Response from a Lawyer

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU
 
JunkYardDogg Donating Member (618 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-04-04 01:46 AM
Original message
Impounding the Machines- Response from a Lawyer
From Cindy Cohn , Legal Counsel
of Electronic Frontier Foundation
For over a week now, I have been contacting all the Lawyers who have filed Court Action on Election issues
I presented them with a target strategy, in its most concise form- to Impound the Voting Equipment, analyze the software and backtrace the servers and Central Tabulators
The following is her reply to me:



Thanks for your thoughts. As you know, private parties don't have
the same powers as the police and district attorneys do to prosecute
crimes. So the tools used in white collar crime investigations just
aren't available to us. The police have been unwilling to exercise
those powers in response to this election.

The problems we've uncovered so far are serious, but under existing
law they don't provide a basis for a lawsuit (and thus the discovery
powers to seek more) unless you can provide evidence that the
election results were so flawed that the wrong person was declared
the winner. We just don't have that evidence. It's a circular
situation -- without the evidence to prove there's been a hack you
cannot get a court to allow you to impound the machines, but the
evidence to prove that things have been hacked is in the machines.

We certainly have been looking at ways we could impound the machines
and do independent testing but unfortunately election law doesn't
provide any ways for private parties to force this to happen. The
recounts in Ohio and New Mexico are both opportunities, but it's
never been done before and not allowed under those rules either. An
attempt to do this in Nevada was just rejected earlier this week. But
we're still pushing for the candidates to ask for this. Another
method is through the Open Records Act, but that's also unlikely to
be successful. We've also asked several counties to do independent
testing on their own:
http://eff.org/Activism/E-voting/
http://eff.org/e-vote/investigate/

So the short answer is that we agree that impoundment and independent
testing are what is needed to further investigate problems with the
machines and we're trying everything we can think of to get there but
the road is not easy.

Thanks again,

Cindy
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-04-04 01:52 AM
Response to Original message
1. so--any "evidence" of fraud is just sitting in these machines and
one thinks it is a problem??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jamboi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-04-04 02:20 AM
Response to Reply #1
7. False Claims Act -- a way to sue in this kind of case
jamboi
12. Use the "False Claims Act"

http://www.taf.org /
False Claims Act Legal Center.

The companies making voting machines could likely be sued in this manner.

Below is an analysis for using the False Claims Act against pharmacutical companies.
A similar analysis could be made on voting machine manufacturers and other companies in the election business.

-------------------------

The proposal is to sue drug companies for fraud under the False Claims Act.

To get a new drug approved by the FDA, a drug company is required to make claims, based on scientific research, that the drug is safe and effective. But, what the government often gets is phony science. Companies make dishonest claims that a drug is safe and effective when scientific research shows otherwise. They suppress or ignore unfavorable research findings and they exaggerate and amplify favorable findings. They then use these same dishonest and deceptive claims to market drugs that are dangerous or ineffective or both. The resulting fraud is in the sale of defective products which fail to perform as claimed. And the biggest customer is the U.S government in its Medicaid and Medicare Programs. So, why isn’t anyone using the False Claims Act to blow the whistle on corporate use of dishonest science. What is proposed has not yet been done by anyone because there are two objections to the proposed lawsuits.


Objection 1. The law suits proposed do not fit the predominate paradigm in which an ‘insider” blows the whistle on fraudulent overbilling by a government contractor.


Objection 2. The drug companies have a unique and overwhelming defense. They point out that the claims they make have been certified as true by the FDA.


Reply to Objection One: The suits proposed don’t fit the mold.


The False Claims Act was revived by Congress in 1986. The immediate problem to be solved was exorbitant overbilling by defense contractors - $1,000 toilet seats and $500 wrenches. The whistleblowers who came forward were employees of those defense contractors. Since 1986, most of the whistle blowing has been about pricing and overbilling and most legal actions have begun with evidence provided by insiders who are blowing the whistle.


Admittedly, the legal actions here proposed do not fit that mold. The proposal is not to sue over the exorbitant price of drugs and we do not plan to initiate a suit based on evidence from insiders. Nevertheless, what is proposed is a type of legal action that was provided for by the False Claims Act from the very beginning.


According to the Taxpayers Against Fraud website, www.taf.org,

“The False Claims Act…focuses specifically at government contractors. It was enacted (in 1883) during the Civil War when the Union Army was routinely sold

- guns that would not fire

- shoddy uniforms that fell apart in the rain

- broken down horses that could barely walk

- bags of sawdust masquerading as gunpowder”


Notice that the target of the False Claims Act was not overbilling but billing for defective products. And, notice that one does not need an insider blowing the>

whistle to prove that the gun won’t fire or that the horse can’t walk.


The proposed lawsuits against Big Pharma are also aimed at fraudulent billing for defective products. And, they are initiated with reference to honest science and not necessarily by an insider. (Note: there was at least one successful whistleblower suit in the ‘90s where the issue was misrepresentation of defective products. This was the case of FMC and the amphibious Bradley Fighting Vehicles that usually sank.)


A student of science who has access to the Internet can find the relevant good science and expose the fraud. Any ‘honest boy’ can blow the whistle on “the emperor who has no clothes”. No insiders are required. Then, once the litigation gets underway, internal documents can be obtained by right of discovery.



Reply to Objection 2: Objection 2 is that ‘the FDA defense’ is an insurmontable obstacle to successful litigation.

Let’s think again of the defense contractor abuses during the civil war – bad guns, old horses and sawdust. What if the contractor’s defense was that the Army Quartermaster’s Office had itself inspected and passed on all the deliveries? And suppose that was true – that high ranking officials in the Quartermaster Corp had looked the other way and were in on the deception. Then what? The answer is obvious.

We sue the corrupt officials as well as the drug companies.


And, that is how we overcome the FDA defense of Big Pharma. The drug companies provide defective products to the government – drugs that are not safe or not effective or both. Their defense is that officials at the FDA certified that those products were safe and effective. Like the honest boy who called out that the Emperor had no clothes, we must stand up and say that the drug companies are corrupt and that officials at the FDA are corrupt and that we are suing both under the False Claims Act for defrauding the government and bankrupting the country. (Now that we have the recent Senate testimony of scientist, David Graham, an FDA insider, suing corrupt FDA officials will not be difficult.)


Good medicine is a matter of life and death. Because medicine is corrupt, millions of Americans suffer or die unnecessarily.


Taxpayers Against Fraud, a non-profit in D.C. is an excellent source of information about the False Claims Act. See their website, www.taf.org . TAF helps whistleblowers find qualified legal representation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
berniew1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-04-04 02:33 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. Workers or machines in urban Cleveland precincts assigned votes randomly
"There's a great diary on kos
(http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/12/2/44647/2043
where the author, jfern, notes patterns of excessive votes for
third-party candidates Badnarik and Peroutka and puts forth a thesis that it is caused by mixing up ballots at multiple-precinct polling places"

these precincts are among the ones I first
pointed out in Cleveland. First they said that these
were mostly Hispanic precincts and the people couldn't
read English and there was nobody there to help them
and they put their punch cards in backwards, but the
precinct they were talkling about had only one spoiled
ballot. Then they said that the order in which the
candidates appear on the ballot rotates from precinct
to precinct and people were given the wrong punch
cards, but there is no example anywhere in Cuyahoga
County of Bush losing votes to third party candidates,
it never happened in any Bush precinct, I already
checked into this, and besides, I found the same
pattern in Butler County. Now they are blaming it on
the counting machines. Insert icon with rolling eyes
here. The fact is that none of the Cuyahoga County
numbers, not to say election returns, can be trusted.
You can quote me. Richard Hayes Phillips PhD
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jamboi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-04-04 03:39 AM
Response to Reply #7
11. Voting machines that malfunction and don't properly count votes.
Can be approached as a consumer-rights suit using this False Claims Act. It's being used successfully right now in other examples. Why not? Might not be an immediate answer, but in the longer run it may be just the thing we need to sue Diebold et al.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
life_long_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-05-04 12:10 AM
Response to Reply #11
31. Diebold sold the machines to the States correct?
Diebold no longer owns the machines, so what is the reason we can't impound them? We(the people/states)own them.
Just thinking out loud...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jamboi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-05-04 12:19 AM
Response to Reply #31
32. Email This Senator to Impound Voting Machines
5. Email This Senator to Impound Voting Machine "Black Boxes"
(as heard on Randi Rhodes' radio program)

Randi Rhodes is calling for everyone to email F. James Sensenbrenner, the chairman of the house judiciary committee. He has the power to subpoena the black boxes that hold the votes in the counties in Florida that have all those suspicious votes for Bush and all used optical scanners. These can be read and verified by a human being. Glenda Hood is the only other person that can do this, and she is never gonna do it.

Copy of sample letter is below. She said we should be nice because we are asking for a favor. He is from Wisconsin and may be fairly reasonable and rational even though he is a Republican.

[email protected]

Dear Chairman Sensenbrenner:

I am writing to request that as head of the judiciary committee you subpoena some black boxes that contain votes from the 47 Florida counties that have suspicious tallies.

One would be asked to believe that 100% of Republicans, 50% of Democrats, and 100% of Independents all voted for President Bush, despite exit polls to the contrary. To further arouse suspicion, all these counties used the same optical scanner system.

Perhaps if you would subpoena and examine the votes in some of these counties, you could put to rest the doubts and suspicions that many Americans harbor about the election. This would serve our country, our democracy, and help heal our great national divide.

Sincerely,



~~~
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
life_long_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-05-04 12:37 AM
Response to Reply #32
33. Thanks jamboi, I will e-mail him. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FormerOstrich Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-04-04 04:52 AM
Response to Reply #7
12. I'm curious and too lazy to look it all up.....
Most software specifically excludes itself from the UCC contract clauses. Wouldn't that prevent the ability to apply the False Claims Act? Since the vendors provide both hardware and software could the False Claims Act be exercised over one but not the other?

Thanks!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
geo Donating Member (879 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-04-04 01:32 PM
Response to Reply #7
23. STARTED NEW THREAD FOR FCA analysis on machine lockdown...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x112002

I think this is a great observation by jamboi, and it deserves a response thread that gets the legal minds going. :) -G
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vote4Kerry Donating Member (372 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-04-04 02:00 AM
Response to Original message
2. What about those machines in Ohio that gave Bush extra votes
I think it was in Franklin County..couldn't they impound the machines there are use that as reason to impound voting machines?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jamboi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-04-04 12:43 PM
Response to Reply #2
19. Madsen recommends focusing on Volusia County
jamboi passes Vote4Kerry's question:
Does anything Madsen have make it easier for us to get voting machines
impounded and examined for fraud?

Madsen's response:
"Yes, concentrate on touch screen machines used in Volusia County, FL

wm"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
For PaisAn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-04-04 02:04 AM
Response to Original message
3. a terrible catch-22
it really sucks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Us vs Them Donating Member (725 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-04-04 02:06 AM
Response to Original message
4. This is rediculous. Replace Voting Machine Code with Illegal Drugs and
watch the reaction change. Police are allowed to search your body and your property if they have 'Reasonable Cause' they might find something worthwhile. If there were pot in those there voting machines, you know for sure they'd find some way of sniffing it out. It's just too bad German Shepherds can't smell foul code.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
intheflow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-04-04 02:17 AM
Response to Reply #4
6. Police don't want to help.
Jim Crow is growing stronger in Florida. :grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Niche Donating Member (687 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-04-04 05:17 AM
Response to Reply #6
13. What about all the police that supported Kerry?
too bad the cops in NY couldn't help or the NY firefighters... ahh. I'm grasping again, where's Serpico when you need him?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Carolab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-04-04 02:11 AM
Response to Original message
5. WTF?
"But we're still pushing for the candidates to ask for this."

Why in HELL wouldn't they? I think we need to ask them to ask for this, people.

Spam time, IMHO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JunkYardDogg Donating Member (618 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-04-04 02:39 AM
Response to Original message
9. My initial Position to Impound the Equipment
The following are core fundamentals upon which I think that you can pursue the E-Voting Fraud Issue:
The Direction which we should be pursuing , legal wise, should be as follows:
1. The numerous, documented cases of vote count discrepancies are NOT accidents, but Prima Facie EVIDENCE of FELONY CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES
2. As such, this amounts to PROBABLE CAUSE
3. The E-Voting Machines are Physical Evidence of CRIMINAL ACTIVITY
4. IMPOUND the Electronic Voting Machines in the Precincts in Question
5. ANALYZE (Forensic Investigation) by Neutral Software Experts- the Software Programs
(there are Experts in the E-Voting Software who know what to look for)-there are documented known programming "aids" to manipulate the vote count built into the machines-the Diebold machines have 2 sets of books, for example

6. Get Court Orders to Get the Server History Records on the Access History of the E-Machines-and the Central Tabulators
this is commonly done in White Collar Criminal Cases where internal E-Mails are used as evidence
We know that these machines and the vote counts were manipulated, but we cannot get the evidence until we
can impound the Machines and Central Tabulators and backtrace the servers' histories
The first machines which we can impound and analyze ( plus the servers) where manipulation can be found, can then be used to seize machines all over the country
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NVMojo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-04-04 02:48 AM
Response to Original message
10. yep, they need to be impounded. Why else would the NV SOS
be such an obstructionist to the Green Party/Libertarian Party lawyer over not giving him the list of numbers needed to select the machines they wanted to recount? They know what they are hiding!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Niche Donating Member (687 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-04-04 05:23 AM
Response to Reply #10
14. Don't we (citizens) have the right to see them?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JunkYardDogg Donating Member (618 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-04-04 11:08 PM
Response to Reply #10
29. Nevada Court Case
I sent my Strategy list to the Nevada Lawyer who filed on this, he never responded to me
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NVMojo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-05-04 03:37 PM
Response to Reply #29
37. I am concerned about the cover up in Nevada and who is connected to it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JunkYardDogg Donating Member (618 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-04-04 11:12 AM
Response to Original message
15. Computer Aberrations are Created by People
It is a known fact that computer aberrations do not happen all by themselves- whatever a computer does, ESPECIALLY if it follows a Specific pattern, it was INTENTIONALLY programmed to do so by a HUMAN BEING-
The voting discrepancies- i.e. overvotes, touch screen choice switching, etc were NOT accidents- they were INTENTIONALLY programmed
by a person to do-
Therefore, these discrepancies WERE CRIMINAL ACTS and are Prima Facie Evidence of Criminal Acts
The E-Voting Equipment is Evidence of Felony Criminal Acts and
MUST BE IMPOUNDED!!!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lthuedk Donating Member (551 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-04-04 11:40 AM
Response to Original message
16. How about contacting the police chief's association?
Aren't they more open minded? Couldn't they exert some pressure?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jsascj Donating Member (425 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-04-04 11:48 AM
Response to Original message
17. Yeah...right
But if the situation were reversed, Repubs would 'find' a way around that catch -22. They would be on it like white on rice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Laura PourMeADrink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-04-04 11:51 AM
Response to Original message
18. Didn't the Republicans Impounded machines in Philly?
Remember early on Election Day, there were machines in Philly that were acting crazy? Then there was something about the Repugs seeking to impound?? I will try to find. If yes, maybe that is a precedent for Ohio dems???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
colonel odis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-04-04 12:51 PM
Response to Original message
20. why can't a group simply ask to see the machines? it's allegedly
our government. or it was before 2000.

can you imagine if the shoe were on the other candidate how many judges would be impounding how many machines?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NVMojo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-05-04 03:39 PM
Response to Reply #20
38. the GP asked to do a recount in NV but were told by the SOS
they had to list the "numbers" of the machines in each precinct county and statewide that they wanted to recount and the SOS would not give out a list of the "numbers" of each machine and where they were located. Someone needs to bust Nevada's ass with a freedom of info request. I don't think they can legally set up such a "catch-22" for someone wanting to audit the machines or votes ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
merh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-04-04 01:11 PM
Response to Original message
21. Have they considered filing a federal civil RICO action?
Edited on Sat Dec-04-04 01:15 PM by merh
Are they just looking at avenues available under the state election laws or have they considered whether they have enough to file a federal civil RICO action?

If they have enough to file a federal civil action, they might be able to ask for a federal court order impounding/protecting the machines until the court can review the issues and decide if the parties are entitled to the inspection and testing of the machines.

It is just a thought. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JunkYardDogg Donating Member (618 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-04-04 02:51 PM
Response to Reply #21
25. RICO SUIT
I found reference to one Rico suit against Bush, et. al, but it was prior to the election
see:
http://www.911forthetruth.com/pages/Rodriguezcomplaint10.b.htm
and
http://www.911forthetruth.com/index.htm
see section #344 on the 1st page
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vote4Kerry Donating Member (372 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-04-04 01:25 PM
Response to Original message
22. Asked Keith Olbermann about this--here's what he said
"Really, I don't know -- possibly if the Ohio Court grants the lawsuit the Greens and Libs are filing Monday to contest the election, or if the GAO follows up on the investigation Conyers et al asked them for."

-Keith Olbermann
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rdmccur Donating Member (622 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-04-04 01:39 PM
Response to Original message
24. How about in Washington state?
There is the most 'legit' reason to do what you are wanting it seems.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
understandinglife Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-04-04 10:53 PM
Response to Reply #24
27. Correct & WA State is the ideal situation to delve deeply...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alizaryn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-04-04 10:48 PM
Response to Original message
26. Man, sometimes I wish I were a well trained thief .....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ccarter84 Donating Member (412 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-04-04 11:02 PM
Response to Reply #26
28. what do you suppose the penalty for that would be
stealing a voting machine I mean....not like I could ever pull it off, but yea I guess felony b/c it's federal property of a certain value...
anyone know what these voting machines cost?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JunkYardDogg Donating Member (618 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-04-04 11:16 PM
Response to Reply #28
30. Cost of a Voting Machine
CCarter84

My best guess is the cost of the Voting machines in the 2004 Election was AMerican Democracy
That's a pretty high price to have paid
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
senegal1 Donating Member (489 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-05-04 02:01 AM
Response to Reply #30
34. Ohhh! Good one! How about a Product Liability Suit
bought about by voters harm by poorly made or intentionally (sp?) poorly made machines? There certainly seem to be plently of voters ready to join a class action suit as well. Put the companies out of business for their actions -- they might start taking notice at that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alizaryn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-05-04 02:21 PM
Response to Reply #30
35. Well said
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hobbes199 Donating Member (430 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-05-04 03:00 PM
Response to Original message
36. Someone needs to just steal one.
8-|
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 01:59 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC