Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Article : raising more questions about the 2004 recount.

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
FogerRox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-09-05 08:18 PM
Original message
Article : raising more questions about the 2004 recount.

Scofflaws or Scapegoats? : Grand jury indicts two mid-level elections board employees, raising more questions about the 2004 recount.
By Teresa James

Robert T. Bennett
Ohio Republican Party chairman will not discuss the recount.
LAST SPRING, Republican Kathy Dreamer and Democrat Rosie Grier sat side by side as they showed a local voting reform activist how ballots are set up and formatted for elections. The process is complicated, and the two women grew more animated as they showed Victoria Lovegren, from Ohio Vigilance, each step of the procedure and each successive layer of safeguards against error.

Dreamer, the manager of ballots at the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections, and Grier, assistant manager, don't share political views. But the pride in their work that shone through when explained the process left no doubt that they took their jobs seriously.

That's why many find it so hard to understand why a grand jury indicted Dreamer and Grier last week for various alleged violations of election law during the county's 2004 recount.

Erie County Prosecutor Kevin Baxter convened the grand jury to investigate charges of recount violations raised by the Libertarian and Green Party presidential candidates. Baxter was appointed by Cuyahoga County Prosecutor William Mason to avoid a conflict of interest; Mason's office represents the board.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
WhiteTara Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-09-05 08:30 PM
Response to Original message
1. Further into the article, I think I see the reason for the indictment
If Baxter's grand jury had not indicted anyone at the board, that would have provided one answer to the question. If the grand jury returned indictments against the board officials who made the decision to use its old recount procedures instead of following Ohio's recount statute, that would have provided another answer. But neither scenario played out. Instead, the grand jury indicted two mid-level board employees who did not have decision-making power.

Speaking at the board's public meeting on September 1, Lovegren voiced her concern that Dreamer and Grier had been made scapegoats for the board's bad decisions. She stood and reminded the board that these employees were acting under procedures set by their superiors.

But she and others who'd attended the meeting in hopes of getting some answers were disappointed. Robert T. Bennett, chairman of the board and chairman of the Ohio Republican Party, replied, Mrs. Lovegren, I can't discuss that with you.

Michael Vu
Ballots were pre-inspected.

Then after a closed-door executive session lasting more than two hours, Bennett told the few remaining members of the audience, including Lovegren, that it could not discuss the 2004 recount while criminal proceedings were pending. He also did not respond to the Free Times ' call for comment.

Criminal proceedings against these two women for what? A stalling, delaying, dehumanizing, demoralizing tactic that smacks of Rove. These animals must be brought to justice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
autorank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-09-05 09:40 PM
Response to Original message
2. Oh yeah...Recommended
I love this one:

"Synenberg said that Baxter claimed that he found a plethora of election law violations.

But elections are very complicated processes, Synenberg said, arguing that a grand jury that lasted little more than two days could not have reviewed and understood the election and recount process well enough to indict Dreamer."

Well, he didn't need a whole lot to indict them.

Someone said that Baxter said that this would be the only indictment(s) for his investigation. Was he Ohio wide? Is this true?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-11-05 10:15 AM
Response to Original message
3. kick n/t
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 May 21st 2024, 05:41 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]

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

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
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