May 25, 2005
Way Off
Nicole Way seems like she's kind of ... off. Not exactly who you would want to put in charge of, say, counting 600,000 ballots. At least she appears to be a reasonably helpful and honest witness.

This exchnage in the context of the now 96 absentee ballots that were later discovered to be uncounted, and consistent with discrepancies in the batch slips
(I summarize)
Korrell: Would the batch slips indicate discrepancies such as missing ballots?
Way: yes
Korrell: Did your staff have instructions to investigate discrepancies on batch slips?
Way: yes
Korrell: what were the instructions?
Way: go look for missing ballots.
Korrell: How many batches were there?
Way: about 3000
Korrell: Were all batches investigated for discrepancies
Way: no

--

The exhibit now up is Batch Slip 55

Korrell: for some reason this batch slip is off by 28 or 29 depending on whether you use the 205 or the 206.
Way: yes

--

Korell is now showing Batch Slip 979 [he said 978, but I think he must have misspoke]

--

Now he's asking about a batch slip summary. He's probably referring to this spreadsheet

Way acknowledges the document was created by her staff during the November election (prior to certification as batches were being processed).
They used it to see how many ballots were being processed and also to identify discrepancies.

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at May 25, 2005 10:28 AM | Email This
Comments
1.
Overruled!

Sit down, Jenny.

Posted by: MIke on May 25, 2005 10:50 AM
2. (durken)

OBJECTION!

This document may point to tons of errors and even fraud- we can't have this admitted!

We burned all of the evidence- so this isn't evidence.

Posted by: Andy on May 25, 2005 10:50 AM
3. In overruling the objection to the admission of the spreadsheet into evidence, Bridges had the lovely observation that, if we excluded evidence that wasn't 100% perfect, then we wouldn't have any evidence in this trial. The courtroom laughed out loud.

Posted by: Danny on May 25, 2005 10:52 AM
4. You said, "Not exactly who you would want to put in charge of, say, counting 600,000 ballots. At least she appears to be a reasonably helpful and honest witness."

You perhaps want someone unhelpful and dishonest? :>)

Posted by: Ron A. on May 25, 2005 10:52 AM
5. FWIW, I think that it is batch 56.

Posted by: Bill H on May 25, 2005 10:54 AM
6. This is getting too hard for us out-of-stater's to follow. Can you add a resource link summerizing the trial similar to what you did during the election fiasco. Put it above "Timeline of the Governor's race."

Posted by: elvis in memphis on May 25, 2005 10:59 AM
7. Bridges seems to be less patient with the objections today. Jenny has found her seat.

Posted by: Andy on May 25, 2005 11:02 AM
8. ...the courtroom laughed out loud.

That is too funny

Posted by: Mike H on May 25, 2005 11:04 AM
9. Man, this is hard to watch. I hope Way doesn't plan to watch a recording of this later.

Posted by: VaCSProf on May 25, 2005 11:05 AM
10. Oops, my bad. I swear I thought I heard them say batch 56. Need better speakers, I guess.

Posted by: Bill H on May 25, 2005 11:06 AM
11. 10 minute recess, Judge said he's getting tired.
Korrell(sp) expects to be done with Ms. Way by noon.

Posted by: Orange Robyn on May 25, 2005 11:08 AM
12. There is a principle that says that one rises to their level of incompetency. I think that Ms. Way is an example.

Posted by: Handy Nick on May 25, 2005 11:11 AM
13. Unfortunatly, the more inept she appears, the stronger the donk case. Maybe they kept her up all night for a reason.

Posted by: Dogbert on May 25, 2005 11:16 AM
14. Way is just a pawn to the Democrat Machine, she needs her own attorney. Actually if she were to open up her interests would probably be more secure than if she continues to obfuscate. One thing about the leadership of the KC Democrat Machine that is for sure and for certain they could care less what happens to her as long as they are able to maintain their veil of plausible deniability. From my viewpoint, ‘no involvement in trying to influence the outcome by the leaders, just honest errors’ looks less and less tenable as time goes by.

Posted by: JDH on May 25, 2005 11:16 AM
15. jenny wants Way to not be answering anymore questions.

What are you afraid of jenny?

Posted by: Andy on May 25, 2005 11:24 AM
16. Thats ok- Garth will be on later.

Posted by: Andy on May 25, 2005 11:27 AM
17. Based on Durkin's first questions to Way, I can summarize the defense case in two words: "shit happens."

Posted by: MIMike on May 25, 2005 11:29 AM
18. Oh a Spider!

Posted by: Will on May 25, 2005 11:37 AM
19. Is it just me, or did she start perking up when the donk lawyer started pelting her with nerfballs?

Posted by: Dogbert on May 25, 2005 11:38 AM
20. "Unfortunatly, the more inept she appears, the stronger the donk case. Maybe they kept her up all night for a reason."

by Dogbert

Can you explain that? I don't know why that would be...wouldn't it be better for the elephant's case? :-) Unless they are trying to show that because she's so inept there couldn't possibly be FRAUD!!! What a dumb argument.

Posted by: megs on May 25, 2005 11:39 AM
21. Actually, Way looks to me like she has the Mother of All Headaches on her. This has to be hell.

Posted by: starboardhelm on May 25, 2005 11:40 AM
22. Anyone else notice a complete turnaround in Ms. Way's responses once Durkan was asking questions???

The change was immediate and overwhelmingly obvious. Now she's answering questions lickety-split, going into detail, etc. No pauses, no weirdness, etc. Just like Bill "I couldn't tell you if I remembered to put on pants this morning" Huennekens.

And with all the forgetfulness, my dad pointed out a possible new affliction: King County Election Amnesia Syndrome. But apparently it only has an effect when the GOP lawyers are asking questions....

Posted by: Scott on May 25, 2005 11:41 AM
23. megs - "Unless they are trying to show that because she's so inept there couldn't possibly be FRAUD!!! What a dumb argument"

That is exactly the case that they are arguing!

Posted by: Dogbert on May 25, 2005 11:43 AM
24. It's not just you Scott. Maybe Bridges bought her a triple grande something rather-n-rather.

Posted by: Editor on May 25, 2005 11:43 AM
25. I too have noticed Ms. Way's responses have been much quicker under questioning by Jenny Durkan.

Posted by: SpaceNeedleBoy on May 25, 2005 11:48 AM
26. So...the Dem's argument is...'We're too stupid to be punished for fraud...Don't hate us 'cause we're stupid.' Sheesh.

How about applying the standard that ignorance of the law is no excuse...that's what the troopers do...just cause you don't know the speed limit doesn't give you an excuse to speed.

Posted by: megs on May 25, 2005 12:00 PM
27. There is a big difference between pleading stupid (for which they are actually quite convincing :) ) and therefore the ignorance of the law case doesn't (shouldn't) work here. With megs' speeding case that is just something anyone could do. Here they are being paid to do a job, which make all the difference. If I tell some one I (as one that is not a dotor) will amputate their finger instead of paying that doctor and I botch it, there is very little recourse. If a doctor botches it he is professionally liable as he SHOULD know what to do. Paid employees SHOULD know what to do and ignorance is even less of an excuse (less than zero??) than with the speeding ticket.

Posted by: Fred on May 25, 2005 12:12 PM
28. Good point, Fred. We pay these people to be both honest and competent. Now it appears that they are a combination of dishonest and incompetent, with the dishonesty and incompetency twining about each other like some monstrous double helix of fraud.

Posted by: Shannon K on May 25, 2005 12:46 PM
29. SK,

Good point. Nice visual. High five!

Posted by: Shannon on May 25, 2005 12:51 PM
30. Notice the fire extinguisher behind Way's head. Must be there if the lies catch any of their pants on fire.

Posted by: Jeffro on May 25, 2005 01:04 PM
31. Does Way look stoned out of her mind or is it me. I was just watching it.

Posted by: Howard on May 25, 2005 01:59 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?