I'm a little disappointed in the press coverage of the trial
Posted by Proud Citizen at 2/28/2008 10:37 PM and is filed under uncategorized 
Of course, the Gilmer Mirror comes out Saturday and I expect they'll do a substantially better job than some of the other papers did. At least they will have understood what the evidence that came out in court really said and what the lawsuit was really about.
The lawsuit that was filed last week was brought against Upshur County by the local Republican party. The desired result was that the county would be forced to provide them with electronic voting equipment even though they had refused to sign a contract.
The whole thing involved a comedy of errors on the part of the Chairperson and Executive Committee of the Republicans. It also seems to have involved some shading of the truth in an attempt to make themselves look better.
It was clear from the evidence that Mrs. Patterson was offered numerous chances to sign the contract with the County. It is also clear that she was advised by both the Secretary of State's Office and the Upshur County District Attorney that the contract was legitimate and their advice was to sign it if they desired to use the machines. Despite this advice from those familiar with the law, instead Brenda Patterson chose to meet with the republican Executive Committee, which I understand is composed of John Melvin Dodd (the loser of the last County Judge race), James Crittenden (it looks like he may very well be the loser of the next Commissioner's race) and Mrs. Patterson. Based on the advice of these three people, the Republican party chose not to sign the contract thus meaning that the upcoming Republican primary is out of compliance with federal voting laws.
One of the factors in the judge's decision was that, by their actions, the Republican party had created a situation with no solution. They had waited to file their lawsuit until even if the judge had been inclined to help correct the mistakes made by Mrs. Patterson he was unable to do so without violating a number of voting laws designed to ensure voting is kept on the up and up.
The newspaper story I read made it appear that the judge's ruling was why the Republicans got to vote at all, but that wasn't the ruling. The Republicans intended to vote on paper ballots all along, and hand count each ballot box in the precinct before returning it to the courthouse for tabulation. It is almost impossible to imagine a situation with more opportunities for voter fraud than the one that is going to exist for all republican voters and candidates on Tuesday night.
The judge also made a specific finding on the record that the County Clerk, Peggy Lagrone, had acted at all times in good faith in her attempts to get the contract signed and in her actions afterwords.
One particularly troublesome piece of testimony from Mrs. Patterson was that she was unaware of the deadline when the contract was due. A deadline had been set so that the final programming of the machines could be accomplished in time to post notices and conduct the tests required by law.
Even though Mrs. Patterson stated under oath she was unaware of the date, this was contradicted by the other witnesses including Upshur County District Attorney Billy Byrd who testified that not only did he tell her to sign the contract, but that he had discussions with her in which the deadline was quite clear.
Perhaps now we see why Comm. Crittenden launched on Mr. Byrd the night before their lawsuit was filed. Was this an attempt to influence a witness's testimony, an example of what is going to occur if he doesn't get on board, or simply a man with a severe lack of understanding as to the way things really work. And, I might add, a lack of concern for ethical political conduct.
This whole thing could have been avoided if Mrs. Patterson had simply signed the contract once the people with legal knowledge had advised her to. Instead, she retreated into her conspiracy chamber where they are less concerned with an effective county government than they are with one they can control.
Bottom line - the Republicans got none of the relief they requested but did manage to force the County to spend money on the fine lawyers who won the case.
Fiscal conservatives my butt.
The lawsuit that was filed last week was brought against Upshur County by the local Republican party. The desired result was that the county would be forced to provide them with electronic voting equipment even though they had refused to sign a contract.
The whole thing involved a comedy of errors on the part of the Chairperson and Executive Committee of the Republicans. It also seems to have involved some shading of the truth in an attempt to make themselves look better.
It was clear from the evidence that Mrs. Patterson was offered numerous chances to sign the contract with the County. It is also clear that she was advised by both the Secretary of State's Office and the Upshur County District Attorney that the contract was legitimate and their advice was to sign it if they desired to use the machines. Despite this advice from those familiar with the law, instead Brenda Patterson chose to meet with the republican Executive Committee, which I understand is composed of John Melvin Dodd (the loser of the last County Judge race), James Crittenden (it looks like he may very well be the loser of the next Commissioner's race) and Mrs. Patterson. Based on the advice of these three people, the Republican party chose not to sign the contract thus meaning that the upcoming Republican primary is out of compliance with federal voting laws.
One of the factors in the judge's decision was that, by their actions, the Republican party had created a situation with no solution. They had waited to file their lawsuit until even if the judge had been inclined to help correct the mistakes made by Mrs. Patterson he was unable to do so without violating a number of voting laws designed to ensure voting is kept on the up and up.
The newspaper story I read made it appear that the judge's ruling was why the Republicans got to vote at all, but that wasn't the ruling. The Republicans intended to vote on paper ballots all along, and hand count each ballot box in the precinct before returning it to the courthouse for tabulation. It is almost impossible to imagine a situation with more opportunities for voter fraud than the one that is going to exist for all republican voters and candidates on Tuesday night.
The judge also made a specific finding on the record that the County Clerk, Peggy Lagrone, had acted at all times in good faith in her attempts to get the contract signed and in her actions afterwords.
One particularly troublesome piece of testimony from Mrs. Patterson was that she was unaware of the deadline when the contract was due. A deadline had been set so that the final programming of the machines could be accomplished in time to post notices and conduct the tests required by law.
Even though Mrs. Patterson stated under oath she was unaware of the date, this was contradicted by the other witnesses including Upshur County District Attorney Billy Byrd who testified that not only did he tell her to sign the contract, but that he had discussions with her in which the deadline was quite clear.
Perhaps now we see why Comm. Crittenden launched on Mr. Byrd the night before their lawsuit was filed. Was this an attempt to influence a witness's testimony, an example of what is going to occur if he doesn't get on board, or simply a man with a severe lack of understanding as to the way things really work. And, I might add, a lack of concern for ethical political conduct.
This whole thing could have been avoided if Mrs. Patterson had simply signed the contract once the people with legal knowledge had advised her to. Instead, she retreated into her conspiracy chamber where they are less concerned with an effective county government than they are with one they can control.
Bottom line - the Republicans got none of the relief they requested but did manage to force the County to spend money on the fine lawyers who won the case.
Fiscal conservatives my butt.
As usually your story is one sided. You say nothing about WHY the contract was in question. There has always been a standard contract the State has for using these machines. Apparently, Ms Lagrone decided to change the contract, to make each party chair be solely responsible for the machines. The Democratic chair signed it with out reading it, I am sure he assumed it was the standard contract.
Reply to this
I'm sorry, but I think you need to read the contract. It was approved by both the local D.A. and the Secretary of State and the contract appears to have followed the election code and I'm sure the wishes of the people of the County who want someone to agree to be responsible for these machines while they are leased to the party. I believe the contract is very similar to those used across the State.
And I agree that my opinion is one sided, hence it being an opinion. But if you notice I allow comments whether I agree or disagree with them. That presents the other side.
Reply to this
This latest blog is an answer to my prayers. I have prayed that someone would see what I have carried in my heart to God daily in prayer. This person has seen the truth in what our Republican Party has become and in its leadership. I hope that you will join me in praying that God will send us new leadership so that the executive committee can begin to unite instead of divide the party and support its elected officials. God Bless You for speaking the truth and not being ashamed to share it.
Reply to this
Aw shucks.
Reply to this
The Republican Executive Committee did not decide anything for Patterson. She basically informed the committee what had happened, how she handled it and what she was planning on doing next. Thought you might want to know the real scheme of things.
Yes, the Republican party does need new leadership because all of these fiascoes are getting extremely embarrassing.
Reply to this
I apologize if I passed on incorrect information. I thought the trial testimony was that the contract had to be approved (or denied) by the Executive Committee that met a day or two before it was due. If they had to approve it, I assumed they were also the ones that made the decsion to deny it.
Do you know if this occurred before the contract was due (Feb. 5) or afterwards? Also, do you know if all member of the Executive Committee were present or just some of them?
Reply to this
The executive committee met on Monday the 4th and were told it was due the next morning, the 5th, at 10:00 a.m. Soooo, as you can see there was some untruth on the stand the other night. I am tired of not hearing the truth and have no respect for any type of liar.
There was a quorum for the meeting.
I also don't appreciate this horrible mess being pushed onto the executive committee because it was already decided before the fact and were just informed about it. It's just not fair.
Reply to this
It sounds like there is a lot more going on here than most people realize and I agree that it is terribly unfair that the EC is catching the blame for something that wasn't their fault.
If I can ask another question, feel free to tell me you cannot answer if that's the case, is it possible/likely that there are a few of the EC who get together with Ms. Patterson to plan out what was going to happen. I get the distinct feeling that there are three or so members of the EC who tend to control the agenda, direction, and tone of the party.
Reply to this
I have no idea about that, I think there are only a few trusted souls and I think they keep it among themselves.
I do agree that it's not fair for the executive committee to be placed for blame because they didn't do anything.
Reply to this
The losers in this whole situation is not the Republican
Chair, the Republican Executive Committee or even the Republican Party. The losers are the registered voters who went to the polling place on election day and were completely striped of their right to a secret ballot. Put a price on that. Deadline,what is the deadline to conduct a test? I can tell you the deadline recommended by the sos is the friday before the election. that date is February 29, 2008. Go to the Texas Secretary of States website, then go to conducting your elections, then click on pct chair, or county clerk. There you will find a memo sent to every election official in the state. Did anyone read this? In the trial it was stressed that the Secretary of state and the da told Republican Chairman that the contract was ok. Why didnt someone call the Secretary of state or the DA and ask them if another test could have been conducted after February 4? The cost of publishing a notice for testing the tablulation equipment is $22.00. She would not conduct another test for $22.00 or she would not conduct another test because she (along with a few others pushing her and believe me, you would be suprised at who)was going to show the Republican Chair and anyone else who really cared that she could do exactly what she wanted to do. The people conducting the test and the testing equipment have been bought and paid for so the only cost of conducting another test was 22.00. In the trial the County Clerk kept stating she would not break the law (programming the Republican Primary) even if ordered too. Did she ever call the Texas Secretary of State and ask them what to do? I can guarantee that she did not because I know what they would have said. The question kept coming up "what will happen if there is not a dre in every precinct" And the answer to that question is on the Secretary of States website also. (You look under HAVA grant process. The $300,000.00 that paid for new voting system was obtained by a grant by the previous County
Clerk. One of the results for noncompliance is paying back the 300,000.00 to the State. Who do you think will have to foot that bill? If the Pattersons are living in the Republican Headquarters, it sure wont be them. does the County clerk have 300,000.00 because if she does not, it will be those people the clerk says she is protecting, the taxpayers of Upshur County.
Reply to this