June 04, 2005
Closer

It's well worth listening to Harry Korrell's closing argument. Go to TVW Audio and fast forward to 4:24:30. It lasts about 45 minutes. The following is Korrell's conclusion, which begins at 5:04:57 --

King County failed wholesale. They failed to implement or to use the required safeguards and the result is exactly the harm that these statutes and WACs were adopted to prevent. There were more votes than voters, both poll and absentee. There were lost ballots, found too late and unsecured to be counted. There were nearly 800 provisional ballots cast directly into AccuVote machines and there has been a complete loss of trust in the elections system. Things are not going to change by giving King County a stern talking to. And it's not an excuse that King County has more ballots to process. King County has long been the largest, most populous and, I suspect, the wealthiest county in the state. There is no justification for its having what Secretary of State Reed called the most backward elections system in the state and making errors that he called appalling. It is not fair to the voters of the rest of the state to have their votes cancelled out by rampant errors and illegal votes allowed to be counted in King County.

Your honor, if this contest action fails, this case, an election with the thinnest of margins, where there are far more found ballots than the margin, overwhelming evidence of error and neglect, presented by both sides, ballots that cannot even after seven months be tied to lawful voters. 1,400 felon votes. Votes of dead and double voters. 265 statewide provisional ballots directly into the AccuVote machine outside of King County. 785 in King County alone. Huge discrepancies. Votes counted that appear not to have been cast by lawfully registered voters. And then a disturbing pattern in the distribution of those discrepancies. If this evidence is insufficient in an election decided by 129 votes, then Washington has no meaningful election contest procedure. This cannot be what the Washington legislature intended.

Your honor, we recognize the magnitude of what we are asking you to do. But we believe and I think the people of this state believe, that the only way to restore legitimacy to our elections system and confidence that the people have a governor who really was elected by the majority of legal voters, is for the court to set aside the tainted results of this election. Nullify that big certificate of election that's been standing in the corner for two weeks on the basis of inaccurate returns, illegal and some fraudulent votes. We submit, your honor, that this result is compelled, not precluded by the application of our State Supreme Court case Foulkes v Hayes and the election contest provisions, the very same ones in this case that are discussed therein. It is also compelled by Hill v. Howell, [search here if the link doesn't work] which pointed out that when there has been "fundamental disregard for the law" it may be appropriate to set aside the results. That case was construing the predecessor to [RCW 29A.68] section 070.

The evidence we have presented shows a fundamental disregard of the law. The evidence we have presented shows that if illegal votes and invalid votes were deducted from both candidates in the proportion in which they were cast in their precincts, a widely accepted method, then Dino Rossi would have won. We have shown that there are in the neighborhood of 3,000 illegal and invalid votes. Some twenty times the margin of victory and the court should set aside the election on that basis as well.

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at June 04, 2005 09:20 PM | Email This
Comments
1. Ut sit magna, tamen certe lenta ira deorum est

Posted by: Dan on June 4, 2005 09:52 PM
2. This is just plain fantastic writing and speaking. Even if I put aside the importance of the outcome of the case, my own preference, etc. I have absolutely been thrilled by simply watching Korrell in action in both the earlier Supreme Court cases and in this case.

He's certainly presented the far stronger closing statements, and ones that "appeal" much more to common sense, and the will of what I suspect is the typical Washinton voter.

Stefan, thanks for presenting this, it was very good to read this conculsion again. Korrell, the man is a true orator.

Posted by: Jeff B. on June 4, 2005 10:08 PM
3. I was fortunate enough to catch Harry Korrell's closing on NWCN. It was indeed awesome, well reasoned, calm, cool, and collected... and in complete contrast to Jenny "the quivering lip" Durkan's too long, rambling, incoherent diatribe.

No matter what happens on Monday, Harry Korrell and the rest of the team are a class act.

Posted by: Tucker on June 4, 2005 10:19 PM
4. It is plain to see the Repubs outclassed the Dems, but the Dems could spin and spew out legal nonsense without having it affect the outcome.
If the ruling goes against the Repubs, it won't be because the Dems won the case - the Repubs will not have jumped over the bar.

The ownness was on the Repubs to climb the mountain. Korrell is a class act regardless of the outcome.

Again, I believe that there should be a Federal investigation of King County directed by Judge Bridges - because the Dems succeeded in proving that King County Elections is corrupt and they have been that way and haven't cared about it for long enough ! Let the Civil suits fly and John McKay start doing what he is paid to do in his own back yard !

Posted by: KS on June 4, 2005 10:35 PM
5. Great closing, but who besides devotees of TVW and this site are going to hear Korrell's words? Will the P-I or the Times publish transcripts of closing arguments? Or are they gonig to simply "boil it down" for their readership?

Posted by: Shannon K on June 4, 2005 10:43 PM
6. Does anyone know what time Monday morning Judge Bridges will make his ruling?

Posted by: Glenno on June 4, 2005 10:45 PM
7. Glenno;

9:00 AM Monday.

Posted by: Encouraged Voter on June 4, 2005 10:49 PM
8. I agree with you Shannon, and when you take into account what the msnmedia showed us on the news with the dems "exciting as drying paint" closing by Durkan, one would never know the Repubs had a point.

Posted by: PC on June 4, 2005 10:49 PM
9. Glenno, it's at 9:00 AM. I'll probably trot out to the car to listen on KVI since I expect the bandwidth on TVW to be hard to come by.

Posted by: Tucker on June 4, 2005 10:51 PM
10. Shannon said at 10:43:
"Great closing, but who besides devotees of TVW and this site are going to hear Korrell's words? Will the P-I or the Times publish transcripts of closing arguments? Or are they gonig to simply "boil it down" for their readership?"

Only one who hears it matters. Judge Bridges. Korrell doesn't have to convince us, Goldy, the right, the left, the center, anyone else but Hiz Onner.

MikeF

Posted by: MikeF on June 4, 2005 10:53 PM
11. "anyone else but Hiz Onner."
And 9 other people in robes.

Posted by: Al on June 4, 2005 11:08 PM
12. Yes, Korrell was excellent. I especially liked his line that went something like " and calling mistakes 'unintentional' DOESN'T cure them, or make them immaterial."

Yes!!! I cheered that line bigtime in my car as those words floated out of my radio. It was COMMON SENSE--something that Dems kept trying to keep out of this trial!

Posted by: Michele on June 4, 2005 11:12 PM
13. Both my little bunchkins decided to take a nap on friday afternoon, so I was fortunate enough to hear the closing arguments uninterrupted. I have to say, Korrell's closing argument was focused, poignant, and compelling. In contrast, the closing argument put forward by the D's was unfocused, reactionary, and bossy (e.g., this court must find...). I'm cautiously optimistic about the R's chances.

Posted by: SheriJo on June 4, 2005 11:15 PM
14. WOW, talk about a closer. That was good, I hope Judge Bridges happens by this site and rereads what he heard on Friday. Then you add what the Shark was pointing out in his post just before this "The Missing Link". The election should be thrown out and charges should be brought to a BIG number of KC Rats.

Posted by: Ray on June 4, 2005 11:22 PM
15. Michele,

Yep, that line was awesome. And it was a paraphrase right out of a truly classic movie, "Cool Hand Luke." Paul Newman's character Luke has a problem with authority, and the prison warden wants to keep him down by giving him ultra harsh punishments for minimal reason like many days in solitary confinement, or as they call it in the movie, "the Box."

At one point, Luke gets put into "the Box" again just because his mother has died, and the warden is worried that a free spirit like Luke, might try to break out of prison to go to his mother's funeral. As he puts Luke into the Box, one of the nicer guards (all guards are called Boss, by the prisoners) says, to Luke "I'm sorry Luke, I'm just doing my job." And Luke comes back with the immortal line "Callin' it your job Boss, don' make it right."

And indeed, callin' the job too hard, or the mistakes unintentional, don't make 'em right in King County either.

And in the even more famous words of Strother Martin as Captain Boss:

"What we have here ... is failure to communicate. Some men [Democrats] you just can't reach."

Posted by: Jeff B. on June 4, 2005 11:37 PM
16. We got lots of discussion and friendly disagreement on the live recount election chat tonight.

http://www.webcityusa.com/chat.html

Posted by: Gary F on June 4, 2005 11:46 PM
17. I liked all the rep attys better than Durkan, et al from the dems. It's one thing to have passion, it's an entirely different thing to have anger and even bitterness surging up from within. She didn't hide it. She exhibited a sense of desparation.

As Carlson said, though, she did do a pretty good job of summation. It's just that she had so very few arrows of solidity in her quiver. And there appeared to be so much more in her of a dread of potential loss in what she'd been sent to protect. Lets face it, for her, this was a major defining moment in her career, and if they lose, her name among the dems with be like that of the captain of the Titanic. The great ship lost on her watch.

Korrell, on the other hand, was intense, but outwardly calm...in control of his speach and direct and logical from topic to topic. He also did not presume to tell the court what it must do in the same demanding way that Durkan did. He made his points as reasonable end points of a logical progression, and showed plausible ways of handling the topics the dems claimed were imponderable.

Beyond that, the extent to which the dems were excusing, obfuscating, and claiming that no legal remedy was possible stood in stark contrast with the reps, and actually did the reps a favor. A reasoned solution is always going to be more compelling than the lack of one...and proving that there was no alternative was the essence of the dem case.

I am prepared to be disappointed come Monday, but I have a much stronger sense of optimism than before, when looking at potentially insurmountable barriars to my desired conclusion.

I don't know about you, but I'm sleeping just fine. And I bet big money the average rep is sleeping better than CG and the elitist leadership of the left.

Posted by: scott158 on June 4, 2005 11:53 PM
18. Scott you hit it well... "sleeping just fine". Remember actions speak louder than words. CG advised her "staff" (the ones that weren't already part of the Olympia cabel) to RENT not buy homes in Olympia. Add to that the haste and hurry to get things rammed through and you know that they knew they were short termers. I'd be curious to see what the reservation lists of U-haul and other movers were right now!
Monday will be interesting. Not only his decision but his reasoning behind it. Whichever way he rules the judge is laying the foundation for elections in this state.

Posted by: Victor on June 5, 2005 12:05 AM
19. I am hoping our new call will be:

Right on! Left out!

Posted by: 4pawz on June 5, 2005 12:13 AM
20. Yes! It's been a great weekend so far!

We even took the Seattle Dinner Train (had to -before Ron Sims decides to yank it away!)

I recommend the Dinner Train to everyone! It was a blast and the employees are priceless! The food was wonderful - as was the wine.

I just can't feel anything but confident about the outcome of the contest!

Posted by: Deborah on June 5, 2005 12:42 AM
21. Well Durkan may have been more impassioned in her closing, but I think it finally dawned on her that "Shoot, Gregoire is one of my best friends and I may be on the verge of losing this thing for her!" I think that's what put the fire in her belly.

But I hope she lost points for going TOO LONG. Seriously. It's as though she thought "all I have to offer is silliness. But if I make it long, I might manage to make it seem like I'm making sense."

Posted by: Michele on June 5, 2005 12:47 AM
22. When Korrell addressed the defendants' excuse that King County "has more ballots to process," I wish he would have pointed out that KC actually has less votes per precinct, less votes per polling place, and less precincts per polling place that many other counties, and specifically Chelan (I believe it was Chelan County's election auditor (?) that testified early in the trial). It is the polling place where the initial and baseline reconciliation required by WAC 434-253-204 takes place--before the votes are transported--and at that level, KC polling places not only do not have more ballots to process, they in fact have fewer ballots to process. Korrell could have driven this stake into the heart of that excuse for KC's errors, rather than poke at it with their large population and wealth argument. I believe that the statistics would show that KC's errors are substantially greater per capita than any other county, but even if they ar not, the bottom line is that their known errors are cumulatively greater than the combined known errors of all other counties, and when that one county changes a virtual landslide win for Rossi (how many votes would Rossi have won by if you excluded King County?), into a dubious loss at best, there is compelling reason to remove the certification of this election.

Posted by: Alaskaboy on June 5, 2005 06:35 AM
23. When Korrell addressed the defendants' excuse that King County "has more ballots to process," I wish he would have pointed out that KC actually has less votes per precinct, less votes per polling place, and less precincts per polling place that many other counties, and specifically Chelan (I believe it was Chelan County's election auditor (?) that testified early in the trial). It is the polling place where the initial and baseline reconciliation required by WAC 434-253-204 takes place--before the votes are transported--and at that level, KC polling places not only do not have more ballots to process, they in fact have fewer ballots to process. Korrell could have driven this stake into the heart of that excuse for KC's errors, rather than poke at it with their large population and wealth argument. I believe that the statistics would show that KC's errors are substantially greater per capita than any other county, but even if they ar not, the bottom line is that their known errors are cumulatively greater than the combined known errors of all other counties, and when that one county changes a virtual landslide win for Rossi (how many votes would Rossi have won by if you excluded King County?), into a dubious loss at best, there is compelling reason to remove the certification of this election.

Posted by: Alaskaboy on June 5, 2005 06:35 AM
24. Sorry for the double-post; I really don't think it merits rereading.

Posted by: Alaskaboy on June 5, 2005 06:36 AM
25. alaska good points

But in a way also doesn't matter: every Wells Fargo branch, whether busiest spot in Seattle or lonliest place in the Palouse has to account for its cash ACCURATELY.

They do that because that choose to; they care

KC doesn't care, knowing the more votes the better for dems, not much risk that overvoting reveals some GOP surge.

Posted by: righton on June 5, 2005 09:08 AM
26. Even though the Ds kept screaming "they have no proof of WHO did what they claim happened" so what?? If I own a store and when I come in to open up in the morning and find that the till is broken open, money and other stuff is missing and the place has been ransacked, I don't HAVE to know WHO did it to know that I was robbed!

Posted by: Michele on June 5, 2005 09:52 AM
27. KORRELL FOR SENATE (vs Cantwork)!!!

Posted by: Skeptical on June 5, 2005 10:19 AM
28. Fac ut gaudeam, Durkanum/McDonaldum. Caesar si viveret, ad remum dareris. (Denuone Latine loquebar?)

Posted by: Cryptometaphor on June 5, 2005 10:26 AM
29. Fac ut gaudeam, Durkanum/McDonaldum. Caesar si viveret, ad remum dareris. (Denuone Latine loquebar?)

Posted by: Cryptometaphor on June 5, 2005 10:27 AM
30. Fac ut gaudeam, Durkanum/McDonaldum. Caesar si viveret, ad remum dareris. (Denuone Latine loquebar?)-Posted by Cryptometaphor at June 5, 2005 10:27 AM


Something like: ... with rejoicing Durkan/McDonald, Caesar lives, ... (and ordinary latin living for a second time)... or something thereabout

Posted by: Cheryl on June 5, 2005 11:26 AM
31. I think Crypto is actually pookleblinky.

/LGF reference

Posted by: Dogbert on June 5, 2005 11:35 AM
32. Korrel was such a good closer, the Judge ignored everything he said.

Where can the BIAW go for a refund of their millions?

Posted by: JDB on June 6, 2005 04:12 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?