Wednesday, October 31, 2012

Attendance Encouraged at Tomorrow's Hearing to Get Pima County to Comply with Existing Election Laws

Update:  From John Brakey-

PLEASE, be in court with us, and bring lots of friends, we need a big presence to show that this is a critical case and “we the people” are paying attention and we expect the judge to do the same.
Thursday, November 01, 2012 @  2 pm
Judge James E Marner’s  Courtroom 668
Pima Superior Court: 110 W. Congress, Tucson, AZ

All we want is “Verifiable Elections”, not more “Election Theater”  Our suit, “It demands that county races be included in the hand-count audit, which is not required by Arizona law. County staff workers and advocates dispute whether it is allowed.” From AZ Star 

Here are the links to what been filed in Pima County Superior Court:
Case No. C2012-6655 Assigned to Hon. Judge E. Marner.

We the People Vs Pima County: 

***Pima County Election Special Action OSC filed 10.25.12 -1 of 2.pdf:

***Election Special Action OSC filed 10.25.12 -2 of 2.pdf:

***Plaintiffs Memorandum in Support of Special Action 10.26.12.pdf:

More info go to Face book “Pima County Elections - Trust but Verify”

Post from Last Friday:

Arizona Citizens Sue Pima County to Enforce Existing Election Laws

J.T. Waldron

Attorney Brad Roach represents the plaintiffs in a bid
to enforce existing election laws.
Citizens in Arizona concerned about Pima County voting procedures are part of a lawsuit compelling the county to follow state voting laws before the upcoming general election. A diverse group of plaintiffs registered as Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, Greens and Independents are suing Pima County's Board of Supervisors to incorporate tasks specified by Arizona State Law 16-615.  The plaintiffs' stated mission is to restore public oversight to the elections process.  Like the rest of the nation, Arizonans share a growing concern that election computers make elections easy to cheat and impossible to challenge.

Laws in place but not currently followed by Pima County involve having poll workers include in every Official Return Envelope a copy of the signed “tally lists” or results tape.  Although this practice has been ignored or abandoned over time, the procedure is a valuable step in providing a useful auditing tool in the event of a recount or contested election.

In other words, the citizens are asking that the official returns be signed on the back by the poll workers and placed in the clear plastic envelope labelled "Official Returns Envelope" at the end of the night's count.

The recurring theme for any audit is the comparison of one set of numbers to another set of numbers and there are many circumstances that would require the comparison of ballots to the official returns or "poll tapes". To facilitate this process, citizens are also requesting the court issue an injunction mandating that Pima County separate the vote-by-mail ballots by precinct.

Handling of vote-by-mail ballots is another task that the citizens would like to see Pima County perform in compliance with ARS 16-602. To prevent Pima County's continued defiance of the law, plaintiffs are requesting that Pima County conduct sufficient randomly selected hand count audits of the vote-by-mail ballots as outlined in state law.

Attorney Brad Roach is representing the plaintiffs and states in his action: "Pima County has a long and sad history of blocking any attempt to monitor the elections process, verify the integrity of the computer systems, or audit the results."

Roach refers to the two billion dollar Regional Transportation Authority (RTA) Election and Pima County's resistance to public oversight and records requests (Pima County Superior Court cases C2007-2073 and C2008-5016).  "This persistent hindering, at every turn, of electors’ and political parties’ attempts to verify election integrity has cost the County hundreds of thousands of dollars in attorney’s fees and resulted in multiple court ordered releases of election information Pima County sought to hide."

This suit also requests the recovery of legal fees incurred.

Partisan politics are fierce on Arizona's Senate floor, but verifiable elections seem to transcend any political differences among the plaintiffs.  Green Party Candidate Dave Croteau, Republican Candidate Bill Beard, Libertarian Elections Specialist Jim March and Paul Hilts, the chair of the Pima County Democratic Party Elections Committee are among the plaintiffs with an interest in the November 5th, 2012 General Election.

Election integrity advocate John Brakey of AUDITAZ adds his take on a familiar theme,  "It's not about right or left, It's about right or wrong - and then when you look further, it's also about greed and corruption." Brakey is also part of the team that patiently waits for Pima County to step aside and allow for an actual audit and forensic exam of those 2006 RTA Election Ballots stored for a court case aimed at further restoring the integrity of elections in Pima County.

To monitor progress and get information for this 2012 elections lawsuit, visit their new facebook page:

Pima County Elections - Trust but Verify at


Thursday, August 9, 2012; Arizona Election Fraud: Is Stealing Two Billion in Taxes a Crime Too Big to Prosecute? :
[1] Link to Judge Kyle Bryson ruling[1]


Attorney Bill Risner, initial disclosure statement which is a mind blowing comprehensive statement of facts collected over many years of investigations and litigation of Pima County:
[1] (Excerpt from statement of facts filed 1/12/12:


Summary of the Four Pima County Cases 09/06/10 by Bill Risner updated 7/16/11 by Jim March and John Brakey 
[1] The Ellen Theisen report on the many Significant Discrepancies in the AZ AG office hand count:

[1] Fraud Flyer with 10 points:

[1] Pima County’s Manger “Chuck Huckelberry” created a monster PR Staff, AZ Daily Star: Josh Brodesky: County's new PR force: Good use of tax funds? Sunday, October 9, 2011:


When It Comes To Election Integrity In Arizona There’s Nothing Like Having An “Elephant in the Room” Or At Least A "Big Donkey" August 8, 2010:
[1] Link to our last appeal[1]: “Opening Brief to Arizona State Court Of Appeals Div 2. Seeking Prospective Relief to Protect the Purity of Future Election Results?:

Help Us Transmit This Story

  Add to Your Blogger Account   Put it On Facebook   Tweet this post   Print it from your printer   Email and a collection of other outlets   Try even more services

Help Us Transmit This Story

  Add to Your Blogger Account   Put it On Facebook   Tweet this post   Print it from your printer   Email and a collection of other outlets   Try even more services

1 comment:

  1. Did you know that you can shorten your links with Shortest and make dollars for every visit to your short links.