Joe Miller Vote Count Appeal Hearing Videos

 

http://www.ktuu.com/videobeta/f0949e99-c230-47a9-a61d-6f4b6df3b0a0/News/VIDEO-Joe-Miller-court-appeal-Miller-attorney-Michael-Morley

(KTUU-DT) Opening arguments from Joe Miller attorney Michael Morley.ktuu

 

http://www.ktuu.com/videobeta/fdff80ca-672f-40a7-8af5-423cdb566bb5/News/VIDEO-Joe-Miller-court-appeal-Scott-Kendall-attorney-for-Sen-Lisa-Murkowski

(KTUU-DT) Video 2 of the hearing. Scott Kendall, an attorney for Sen. Lisa Murkowski, presents his case.


 

http://www.ktuu.com/videobeta/e5e9f08d-a8bf-49ca-bf43-e369b08974cd/News/VIDEO-Joe-Miller-Court-Appeal-Joanne-Grace-attorney-for-Division-of-Election

(KTUU-DT) Joanne Grace, attorney for the Division of Elections, presents to the court in the third video portion of the hearing. We experienced a server error for about 10 minutes and have cut out the portion of Grace's presentation, which we continue in the next clip.

 


http://www.ktuu.com/videobeta/6dc6f658-3d8a-420e-9746-90ef65d3ea6a/News/VIDEO-Joe-Miller-Court-Appeal-Joanne-Grace-attorney-for-Div-of-Elections

(KTUU-DT) Video #4, part 2 of Joanne Grace's presentation to the court. Grace is an attorney for the Division of Elections. We pick up on this clip as our server error was fixed.



 

http://www.ktuu.com/videobeta/b77d16d7-108b-4bb8-be65-cdf17d96d622/News/VIDEO-Joe-Miller-Court-Appeal-Michael-Morley-closing-statements

(KTUU-DT) Michael Morley, an attorney for Joe Miller, makes closing arguments in the Alaska Supreme Court.

Joe Miller yesterday issued a press release about the hearing, an excerpted transcript of which follows:

In Miller vs. Treadwell, the Supreme Court of Alaska heard oral arguments from our attorney, who emphasized the same points that we’ve made all along:

• The Alaska legislature established a clear, bright-line test for determining the validity of write-in ballots to prevent bureaucrats and state officials from influencing the outcome of elections by deciding which ballots to count.
• State law forbids for the Division of Elections to review thousands of write-in ballots that were rejected by automated tally machine without doing the same for other candidates who appeared on the ballot.

During the oral arguments, the Supreme Court appeared concerned that a lower-level court ruled in favor of the State of Alaska without giving our side a chance to gather evidence on a number of troubling situations that appear to violate existing election laws:

• According to official state records, thousands of people were permitted to vote without showing identification.
• The handwriting on all the write-in ballots from several precincts was the same, or appeared to be written by only a few people.

A review by our campaign revealed that several hundred convicted sex offenders voted, which may indicate a wider problem of hundreds or thousands of ballots cast by those who were ineligible to do so.

The tenor of the Court's questions shows that it believes we have raised substantial legal questions. All we are asking is that the Supreme Court applies the plain text of Alaska law as written.

The State of Alaska clearly wants the Supreme Court to ignore this evidence and hope that the election was conducted correctly without any type of vigorous investigation.

The core American values of equal protection under the law and fundamental fairness require that the Miller ballots are counted and reviewed in the same fashion as Lisa Murkowski’s, by hand, and that the final count include only those who were actually eligible to cast a ballot.

This court case is about ensuring a fair and democratic election is held in Alaska.