King County identifies previously uncounted ballots (Washington)

[spotbird]

King County Elections Director Dean Logan will ask the Canvass Board on Wednesday to amend the certified results of the November 2, 2004 General Election to include a series of absentee ballots wrongly rejected during the original canvas.


Approximately 561 absentee ballots were mistakenly rejected because the signature on the ballot did not match the original voter registration records. In fact, these were signed ballots where a signature was not on file in the county's voter registration system. Original registration records should have been retrieved to verify the ballot signatures.

(skip)

Logan said staff will retrieve the ballots, review past registration records for signature comparisons and present all valid ballots to the canvassing board on Wednesday, December 15. Logan said state law specifically authorizes the canvass board to amend the certification of an election when a discrepancy or inconsistency is identified in the original canvas.

(more)


http://www.metrokc.gov/elections/news/2004_12_13.htm

[ClintCooper2003]

1. excellent find. That is verrrrrrry good news! n/t

[papau]

2. Any bets that we suddenly found near perfect matches on GOP ballots

but not on Dem ballots.?!

[geo]

5. Question: Dean Logan Dem. or Rep.?

Does anyone know off-hand? :) -G

[noamnety]

7. He's a dem

He's been alternately praised and sued by both parties.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002099377_logan23m.html

[geo]

9. good to hear....

Praised and sued by both? Right on... lol :) -G

[geo]

3. Finger crossing time!! :)

This could be the determining factor in this election. Let's hope they come out of the wash looking blue. :) -G

p.s. http://vote.wa.gov/general/recount_resultsbycounty.aspx for the latest numbers in the Washington recount.

[senegal1]

4. Good. n/t

[GetTheRightVote]

Crossing my fingers, kick

[Joe Chi Minh]

6. It seems

to me an outrageous criterion. I change my signature from time to time; and I can't think of any cogent reason why anyone should not be free to change their signature, on official documents, no less than informal ones, at least from year to year.

It's always going to be a rough and ready criterion. Our banks in the UK will not accept liability for disbursing funds on the production of a false signature - mere alteration wouldn't come into it. If the election officials want to query the authenticity of signatures, then a sworn expert should be employed to examine them. Don't tell me.. a whole new profession of "bent", neocon-activist signature experts would suddenly emerge from under stones.

[rumpel]

8. CSpan 2 Gubernatorial Oral Argument Live at 4:30p EST

Washington (State) Supreme Court
The beginning and end of this live program may be earlier or later than the scheduled times.