Minn. Senate Case Judges Reverse Ruling To Toss Coleman Witness On Double Counting Of Votes

[Purveyor]

Source: Associated Press

Republican Norm Coleman has caught a break in his Minnesota Senate election trial related to his allegation that some Minneapolis residents got two votes.

On Thursday, the three judges in the case have reversed their ruling from a day earlier that excluded a Republican poll worker's testimony.

The woman had testified to having direct knowledge of an error that could have caused some voters to have two ballots included in the race.

In court Wednesday, Pamela Howell's testimony was struck after it was discovered she supplied written materials to Coleman's campaign that was not also given to that of Democrat Al Franken. The judges said then it was grounds to toss out her testimony entirely under civil trial rules.

But in a written order, the judges said the "inadvertent" error wasn't in bad faith and shouldn't cost Howell the right to testify.

Read more: http://www.grandforksherald.com/event/apArticle/id/D96JC1BG1/

[T Wolf]

1. Who got to them and how? Threats, bribes, what? Everything a puke does is in bad faith.

Once that truth is acknowledged, it makes the correct thing to do obvious.

[montanacowboy]

2. So this will go on till Normie wins?

This has gone way beyond and is getting ridiculous. Normie will continue with his crooked lawyers until he wins. He is still meeting with the Repukians just like he is still a Senator.
The are counting on his return.

[AlinPA]

4. It looks like this election in MN is not going to be resolved.

[FudaFuda]

14. It's time to throw them in the ring and let 'em fight it out.

Or flip a coin. Heads I win, tails you lose.

[scytherius]

3. Why this is a GOOD thing

What you/we do NOT want are any substantive appealable issues in this case. Not permitting this testimony sure would be one. It is much tougher to win on appeal a finding of fact than a ruling on the law. Just because they permit the testimony, doesn't mean they are saying it will carry the day. I would rather see them take as much evidence as they can and then rule against Coleman.

As painful as it is, the Court needs to slog through this one. You certainly don't want an issue overturned on appeal and sent back for more hearings.

[w4rma]

5. Agreed. In the long run this is good for Franken. (nt)

[elocs]

6. Right, good point, but probably lost on those who view anything which doesn't overtly favor Franken

as some kind of conspiracy. If this reversal were the other way around and favored Franken, people here would be applauding. Every ruling by the judges which is not liked here is not a huge conspiracy to hand the election to Coleman. These types of ruling are not uncommon. We need this portion of this legal proceeding with this panel of judges to play out to its conclusion so there will not be any questions by your average MN voter as to the legitimacy of Franken's win.

[scytherius]

7. Well said. n/t

nt

[No Elephants]

11. In fairness, not everyone gets the ins and outs of appeals.

[Winterblues]

9. The whole point of her testimony though is to say different procedures were followed

in differnet precincts and then coleman can use that testimony for an appeal to the Extreme Court which ruled on exactly those same merits in Bush* v Gore. If Coleman succeeds in getting his case before the Highly Partisan Extreme Court he will win his case. That is why he now has Ben Ginsberg as his attorney, the same Ben Ginsberg that argued Bush*'s case in 2000.

[No Elephants]

12. If he appeals this state law case to the SCOTUS, I hope the Justices have the decency to

decline review.

[xxqqqzme]

15. Then Ginsberg cannot be in this pro bono.

Who is paying his billable $1000/hr?

[No Elephants]

10. Good point. Thanks.

[BootinUp]

8. could have? if the stars were aligned, and pigs could fly?

This testimony sounds like it is worthless anyways.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

13. Yep...

Republican election judge - surprise surprise

"Inadvertently" dealing under the table with Coleman's team - Ok sure.

"Could have" - consider the source

[struggle4progress]

16. Senate trial judges order ballot envelopes opened

Feb 26 2009 5:37PM
Associated Press
Eds: APNewsNow; Will be led.

ST. PAUL, Minn. (AP) Judges in the Minnesota Senate trial are ordering counties to open secrecy envelopes for about 1,500 rejected absentee ballot to see if voters mistakenly included their registration materials inside.

The judges have previously ruled that voters who made that mistake could still have their votes counted since they made a good-faith effort to register.

The order instructs counties to sort the envelopes into three piles: Those containing completed registration, those with incomplete registration and those with no registration. They are then ordered to make lists of each pile and forward them to the Minnesota Secretary of State ... http://www.kxmb.com/News/337665.asp