Alleged voter fraud follow up

[snorkle]

I can't believe people still bring up the infamous "Roast". My god, she made fun of some other candidates during an election campaign. I mean when you consider sock hands and RJ in the same race, it's a material rich environment.[]

Back to the issue at hand. Our Daughter of the American Revolution forgets another cornerstone of our system; The presumption of innocence. A principle that requires the government to prove the guilt of a criminal defendant and relieves the defendant of any burden to prove his or her innocence.

That is where the two adverbs that Kathy disregards are important; "knowingly and willingly". You see, it's not up to Tiffany to prove she didn't know; It's up to the prosecutor to prove that she did KNOWINGLY and WILLINGLY attempt to defraud the electorate.

Snork in a Seer Sucker Suit;
Now, I sir, ain't one of your Big City Lawyers, but I know that this here prosecutor ain't gonna git that dog to hunt(nice pun, eh?).

I'm telling you two things;
1. You're never going to stop the Tiffany hate campaign.

2. You're going to be disappointed when the Prosecutor drops this turd of a case.

[missydog1]

Yes, that one was published in the BIC too.
http://www.bigislandchronicle.com/2012/0...-election/
Also
http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/19135...raud-probe

This is a summary of Hawai'i voter fraud cases done by Hawai'i Reporter:
http://www.hawaiireporter.com/hawaiis-vo...oubles/123
Includes the big one where a few received jail sentences.

Ran into the Hunt Ethics complaint story while I was looking around.
http://www.civilbeat.com/2012/10/17318-b...nty-clerk/



Kathy

[missydog1]

Another straw man argument, snorkle. I don't even know where to start. We need HiloPuna in here to straighten it out. []

I am not disregarding Knowing and Wilfuly, snorkle. What I did was put them in their proper place in the statute. I tethered them to their actual meaning, whereas you want them to roam free snarling and snapping and meaning whatever you say they mean. Whereas my point is that the Legislature wrote the statute and inserted them to have a specific unambiguous role.

The police have more than enough on knowingly and wilfuly, but here is where I don't need to tell you what it is, because Tiffany will find these details out when it is told to her attorney, and not by me, and not on Punaweb.

I do not forget the burden of proof in the case. Please show me where I forget it.

I seem to have irked you by mentioning the DAR. I think the organization will survive your snark. I'm proud of my ancestors who fought in the Revolution, and who spent the winter at Valley Forge. It doesn't make me anything special, but it humbles me to think of their service, and it's a window into history.

You may continue to tease me about this, but I think it's silly of you.

Kathy

[HereOnThePrimalEdge]

I would guess in the case where the candidate employed the help of law students there was plenty of evidence to show intent, as the fraud was so organized. The same with the phony absentee ballots, a multiple ballet paper trail. Hard to say, whoops, I had no idea.

I'd be curious to see the outcome of the five voters who cast two ballots in the 2012 election. That seems closer to Tiffany's case, only worse since they presumably voted not only outside their own district once, but also in their own district an additional time.

[missydog1]

I would think that the student fraud was a case of Election fraud under 19-3, which is a whole different offense and more serious penalties than 19-3.5 (Voter fraud) which would be the Hunt investigation. There's no comparison between the two because they have different elements as the burden of proof.

Don't know enough details about the 2010 case.
If money changes hands or voting equipment is tampered with, as a couple of examples, that is the more aggravated fraud. There is fraud that is a serious attempt to rig an election, and there is voter fraud, which is an individual offense that is not part of a larger scheme and where there is no compensation, or intimidation of others.

If you read the statutes it becomes clear that intent regarding the election outcome is important to 19-3 but not to 19-3.5.

Kathy

[snorkle]

You have every right to be proud of your ancestors Kathy. I honor them also.

[HereOnThePrimalEdge]

Here is what I personally have learned to date:

* Tiffany may have had some problems with her voter residency.
* It is now in the hands of the police department and/or prosecutor's office.
* The election is over, she lost, so however her residency situation is determined, it will have no affect on the the results of the election.
* There have been numerous other proven cases of election fraud on the Big Island and in Hawaii. Tiffany is not the the first or only case.
* The most serious and easily proven cases were prosecuted, the others faded away
* The DAR is a respected organization
* The only new information likely to come from this case in the future is:

1) Tiffany gives her statement to HPD
2) The police department issues a press release
3) the prosecutors office makes an announcement.

None of that will be posted by Tiffany, HPD, or the prosecutors office on Punaweb first. It will be a hard news story. People who only want to BUMP this topic back to the top by trolling "Has anyone heard anything?" have nothing to contribute but their own ignorance. And not even honest ignorance, just no-account pretend ignorance. Buy a newspaper. Check Hawaii News Now. You'll find it there first. Punaweb can then be a valuable sounding board.
* If anyone is worried that should this incident fade away, Tiffany will have some kind of advantage in the 2016 election, forget it. Almost no one in the general public is going to pay attention to the 2016 election until July or August 2016.

My vote? We stop masticating the gristly remnants of this topic until 9/16. Unless new information from 1), 2), or 3) above comes to light.

[HereOnThePrimalEdge]

KathyH -
I edited my comments about people asking for updates. I have no problem with an honest inquiry. It's the phony questioners who are only trolling for a BUMP to the topic. It's pretty clear which are which.

not feel compelled to control the life of the topic
I doubt that's even possible.

Let it fizzle out organically?
I agree. Once you add all of the ingredients, there's nothing like a good compost pile out back, letting nature take it's course.

[HereOnThePrimalEdge]

You will waste your time looking... for her return, truly.

On that you and I agree 100%.
Wiser words were never spoken.

(btw - when I comment on Sativa The Mexican it's not from research, it's memory, so the time involved is only in the typing. But you're right, it's still time.)

[pahoated]

Doubtful she is a contender in 2016, especially if Paleka does a good job. Yoshimoto provided a calming influence to the radicals on the council, maybe Paleka will do the same. If you look at the county council agenda, there is usually zero with anything to do south of Ainaloa. Have to give it to Poindexter, she stays focused on her district and she has had a ton of improvements sent that way during her first tenure. She now has a bill to allocate money for IT services to increase broadband. Ford is going to be gone, Wille will be kind of by herself with her zoned out views and facial expression. The make up of the council looks good for most of the island, south Puna not so much.

"Mahalo nui Pele, 'ae noho ia moku 'aina" - kakahiaka oli