Missouri Election Board dodges Galloglas' "Voter Arrest Trial"

This has been off the boards for several weeks but here is a short update for the present.


The original post (75,000 views here, and then went viral) was posted here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x3735725#3735725

and my first chance to answer all the posts was here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=3735725&mesg_id=3737989


Yesterday, I went to court expecting to see my accusers and have my trial. But it was not to be.

The Eastern Jackson County Election Bureau, after having me arrested on August 5, 2008, for refusing to show "signature ID" (read: Photo Voter ID) while attempting to vote, failed to show up at the Municipal Court to testify about the crime they charged me with.

Struck me as very odd that none of the six election judges who had (according to the Summons) "'(been placed)' "placing such persons in fear of safety by refusing to show proper I.D. when voting", found the time to come and testify. It was also a giveaway when neither of the two arresting officers came forward.

Gee, did they get together beforehand and decide not to show up? If so, why?

The trial has been rescheduled for 10-22-2008 and can be rescheduled again. Off course, that would put the trial past the election date. And then what lessons can we learn? To be better prepared for 2012? Sheesh!!

I'll have more to say, very soon. In the meantime, please find the link below to Rhiannon Ross' excellent article below. It is the best coverage being done on this issue (Oh, Snap!! The KCStar forgot to cover the this story... again).

I'll be back in a few hours. Gotta' go hang a lantern in the Old North Church. (The Cagers are coming! the Cagers are coming!)


http://kctribune.com/article.cfm?articleID=18334

kick ass.

I wonder what the message there is, hmm?

they are merely playing some Chess Match with me. Consequently, I imagine that come Monday (as it did after Easter, 1916) there needs be a great scattering of pieces across the squares, in order to clear the air.

Tiocfaidh ar la !!

I like that warning! And you know they're already out there doing their job for the republicans to suppress the vote.

Why is this county even bothering to waste it's money. The prosecutors should just drop your case. What a waste of taxpayer's money. They know they are so wrong on this issue.

And good for you for showing up and continuing to fight for what you know is right, galloglas!

:yourock:


Sonia

I read all about it. Good show, 'ol Chap, jolly good show.

Look for the streets to fill on Monday!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=13MQFCfCYdQ

:kick:

I meant to call you yesterday and just got busy and time got away from me.

I am so glad to hear about what happened in court. Good news! :bounce:

Rhiannon's article was also very good.

I'd explore making a further motion. I don't know about your jurisdiction, but a police officer not appearing in support of a summons is not a "typical" or trivial thing and can easily result in a dismissal (perhaps what they were hoping for -- a silent end).

But they may also, as you suggest, be purposely delaying. This is abuse of and contempt for the court. And the delaying may in fact be an attempt to deny you the vote again -- on the basis of the non-adjudicated, therefore still (falsely) claimable -- "threat" they feel. And to repeat the "ID as threat" fraud on other voters.

You may be able to forced some or all of them -- particularly the cops -- to "show cause" for their failure to appear. Unless the judge is in with them, it shouldn't hurt to formally pose your concerns to him/her.

At the very least you could generate another news item or two during the "down time" before 10/22.

---

It is now all on the line.

..."easily result in a dismissal (perhaps what they were hoping for -- a silent end.)"

It's refreshing to see your perspective on this.


A kick and a shout out to galloglas as well.










.

Best wishes, thanks for the update. Hang in there.

(Glad to see you have a lawyer. You can't play the hand yourself.)

I hope your lawyer is doing plenty more. If not you must switch lawyers if needed. He may be bought, he may be above his competence.

Give a high profile lawyer a call. They'd love it. They'd talk for free. I'd bet they'd take it for free or percentage fee. They probably followed and discussed this case already.

Geoffrey Fieger, lawyer to the infamous Dr. "death" Kevorkian, UNTIL they split BEFORE the doc went to jail, practices in many different states. He's good. There are many expert lawyers. I dunno.

The idea that they in mass did not show in order to commit further election fraud is maddeningly rich. If they get wind of something like this, they'll return with flamethrowers hanging from their beltloops.

At minimum it was pure harassment not to show, imbuing their initial acts as harassment also. That you would be one of those 'certain kind of voters.' (lee-brul)

Sorry that I can't be much help except to be here thinking of what it might feel like to be you during this battle. I see it as important because poll workers all over will be watching what happens and it will dispel some of the lies they will be told by Republican operatives.

Be well, be strong, and be smart in this.

:patriot: :patriot: :patriot: :patriot: :patriot: :patriot: :patriot: :patriot: :patriot: :patriot: :patriot: :patriot: :patriot: :patriot: :patriot: :patriot: :patriot: :patriot: :patriot:

:pals:

On Nov 4 (if this goes no further) they will do the same thing again to you and many others.
Their purpose will be achieved, because you can't get released on Nov 5 and still cast your vote.

If only there was some kind of way that an injunction or something could be imposed that could last thru No 4.

This one person one vote concept really sounds intriguing. I'm really curious to see what it would look like if it would ever come to pass.