NASA's disorganization woes revealed: Wanjigi, Otieno and Raila's children

[Nefertiti]

Trouble started here

[Nefertiti]

A repeat will readily expose rigging patterns.

Kadame' theory that rigging evidence in SCOK can't be ascribed to either candidate but rather IEBC is something I have doubts over. If the SCOK exposes rigging,I hope they will let out in whose favor it was done

Amen.

[bryan275]

A repeat will readily expose rigging patterns.

Kadame' theory that rigging evidence in SCOK can't be ascribed to either candidate but rather IEBC is something I have doubts over. If the SCOK exposes rigging,I hope they will let out in whose favor it was done

Are we still waiting for SCoK to tell us who stood to benefit the best from the massive fraud?  This pussyfooting around the criminal eleents amongst us is akin to being their getaway drivers. 

"Mwizi ni mwizi!"

[Nefertiti]

A repeat will readily expose rigging patterns.

Kadame' theory that rigging evidence in SCOK can't be ascribed to either candidate but rather IEBC is something I have doubts over. If the SCOK exposes rigging,I hope they will let out in whose favor it was done

Are we still waiting for SCoK to tell us who stood to benefit the best from the massive fraud?  This pussyfooting around the criminal eleents amongst us is akin to being their getaway drivers. 

"Mwizi ni mwizi!"

I recall you impugning the justices before the 1st. Patience pays.

[RV Pundit]

If no rigging or fraud evidence was tendered don't expect judges to cook one for you. As far as I know what tilted the scales was that AUDIT of form 34s and servers. The audit does tell NOT you anything except that some forms were not proper and server were not well secured. Judges can ask DPP & Police to find the evidence by launching investigation.

NASA who've made rigging & fraud & manipulation allegations - need to bring their evidence forth.

[vooke]

The court can only base its findings on the evidence presented to them. 

A repeat will readily expose rigging patterns.

Kadame' theory that rigging evidence in SCOK can't be ascribed to either candidate but rather IEBC is something I have doubts over. If the SCOK exposes rigging,I hope they will let out in whose favor it was done

Your description of Kadame's views is suspect. Want to say that again?

I know. That's what I said to vooke but seeing his mischaracterization here its clear he didn't get what I was saying. He and Robina severally made an argument that the mere fact that the court said it didn't find evidence of Uhuru's wrong-doing surely means the "fumbling" must not have favoured Jubilee. Assuming there was no way the court could have said it found no evidence of Uhuru's wrong-doing if IEBC's wrongs favoured him. I simply said in response that this assumption was unwarranted. If you have evidence that A's wrong doing favoured B, that is not enough to attribute the wrong-doing to B. That's what vooke is misunderstanding and misstating.

If you look at NASWA's petition, there were clear allegations of rigging in favor of Uhuru by IEBC. The other allegation is collusion of IEBC and Jubilee in chasing of NASWA agents from central and RV polling stations.

So if SCOK concludes there was ANY rigging,it must be on these lines,and I doubt they can rule there was rigging but stop short of blaming Uhuru. That's all

mathematical additions in favour of the 3rd Respondent.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B2rMMQJiqMB8QTNpSjhDaFF0Yms

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

A repeat will readily expose rigging patterns.

Kadame' theory that rigging evidence in SCOK can't be ascribed to either candidate but rather IEBC is something I have doubts over. If the SCOK exposes rigging,I hope they will let out in whose favor it was done

Are we still waiting for SCoK to tell us who stood to benefit the best from the massive fraud?  This pussyfooting around the criminal eleents amongst us is akin to being their getaway drivers. 

"Mwizi ni mwizi!"

Mwizi ni mwizi indeed.  For me, the pussyfooting ended at the verdict.

[bryan275]

A repeat will readily expose rigging patterns.

Kadame' theory that rigging evidence in SCOK can't be ascribed to either candidate but rather IEBC is something I have doubts over. If the SCOK exposes rigging,I hope they will let out in whose favor it was done

Are we still waiting for SCoK to tell us who stood to benefit the best from the massive fraud?  This pussyfooting around the criminal eleents amongst us is akin to being their getaway drivers. 

"Mwizi ni mwizi!"

I recall you impugning the justices before the 1st. Patience pays.

Yes, i was guilty of relying too much on our history of a bent bench.  I apologise unreservedly to the Good Judge and his incorruptible bench of 4 judges.

[bryan275]

All this doesn't change the fact that 542,352 votes were added onto Uhuru's votes as found by the US statistician. 

[Kadame7]

The court can only base its findings on the evidence presented to them. 

A repeat will readily expose rigging patterns.

Kadame' theory that rigging evidence in SCOK can't be ascribed to either candidate but rather IEBC is something I have doubts over. If the SCOK exposes rigging,I hope they will let out in whose favor it was done

Your description of Kadame's views is suspect. Want to say that again?

I know. That's what I said to vooke but seeing his mischaracterization here its clear he didn't get what I was saying. He and Robina severally made an argument that the mere fact that the court said it didn't find evidence of Uhuru's wrong-doing surely means the "fumbling" must not have favoured Jubilee. Assuming there was no way the court could have said it found no evidence of Uhuru's wrong-doing if IEBC's wrongs favoured him. I simply said in response that this assumption was unwarranted. If you have evidence that A's wrong doing favoured B, that is not enough to attribute the wrong-doing to B. That's what vooke is misunderstanding and misstating.

If you look at NASWA's petition, there were clear allegations of rigging in favor of Uhuru by IEBC. The other allegation is collusion of IEBC and Jubilee in chasing of NASWA agents from central and RV polling stations.

So if SCOK concludes there was ANY rigging,it must be on these lines,and I doubt they can rule there was rigging but stop short of blaming Uhuru. That's all

mathematical additions in favour of the 3rd Respondent.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B2rMMQJiqMB8QTNpSjhDaFF0Yms

I think you're still making the leap/assumption. Look, Uhuru or Raila are not the only persons with interests deep enough to motivate interference in a process like that. Without some more evidence, an assumption like that would be unwarranted even though common sense tells you to make it. Imagine the hypothetical example where a powerful cartel stands to gain or lose big should Uhuru or Raila win and they decide to take matters into their own hands to manipulate the result either way and ensure their preferred outcome. If a court assumed that only Uhuru/Raila could have done so in that instance, it would be assuming falsely. Also, please understand that there is a difference between what parties claim and what the court does.

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

I think you're still making the leap/assumption. Look, Uhuru or Raila are not the only persons with interests deep enough to motivate interference in a process like that. Without some more evidence, an assumption like that would be unwarranted even though common sense tells you to make it. Imagine the hypothetical example where a powerful cartel stands to gain or lose big should Uhuru or Raila win and they decide to take matters into their own hands to manipulate the result either way and ensure their preferred outcome. If a court assumed that only Uhuru/Raila could have done so in that instance, it would be assuming falsely. Also, please understand that there is a difference between what parties claim and what the court does.

The bold.  I think there is legal term for it, but I am a little shallow there.  Something that describes a court that is inquisitive and can make new findings - on the basis of evidence before it - that are not necessarily in the pleadings vs a court that only deals with the prayers before it.

[Empedocles]

In 2013, Caroli Omondi stole the money which was supposed to pay the agents. Nothing was done.

Finding out who own the "rag" is completely avoiding the internal problems NASA experienced during 8.8 and will most likely, yet again, experience on 17.10.

[vooke]

The court can only base its findings on the evidence presented to them. 

A repeat will readily expose rigging patterns.

Kadame' theory that rigging evidence in SCOK can't be ascribed to either candidate but rather IEBC is something I have doubts over. If the SCOK exposes rigging,I hope they will let out in whose favor it was done

Your description of Kadame's views is suspect. Want to say that again?

I know. That's what I said to vooke but seeing his mischaracterization here its clear he didn't get what I was saying. He and Robina severally made an argument that the mere fact that the court said it didn't find evidence of Uhuru's wrong-doing surely means the "fumbling" must not have favoured Jubilee. Assuming there was no way the court could have said it found no evidence of Uhuru's wrong-doing if IEBC's wrongs favoured him. I simply said in response that this assumption was unwarranted. If you have evidence that A's wrong doing favoured B, that is not enough to attribute the wrong-doing to B. That's what vooke is misunderstanding and misstating.

If you look at NASWA's petition, there were clear allegations of rigging in favor of Uhuru by IEBC. The other allegation is collusion of IEBC and Jubilee in chasing of NASWA agents from central and RV polling stations.

So if SCOK concludes there was ANY rigging,it must be on these lines,and I doubt they can rule there was rigging but stop short of blaming Uhuru. That's all

mathematical additions in favour of the 3rd Respondent.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B2rMMQJiqMB8QTNpSjhDaFF0Yms

I think you're still making the leap/assumption. Look, Uhuru or Raila are not the only persons with interests deep enough to motivate interference in a process like that. Without some more evidence, an assumption like that would be unwarranted even though common sense tells you to make it. Imagine the hypothetical example where a powerful cartel stands to gain or lose big should Uhuru or Raila win and they decide to take matters into their own hands to manipulate the result either way and ensure their preferred outcome. If a court assumed that only Uhuru/Raila could have done so in that instance, it would be assuming falsely. Also, please understand that there is a difference between what parties claim and what the court does.

It's actually possible for NASWA to plant rigging evidence in favour of Jubilee just to dig it out in court. NASWA did it but  the mathematical additions are in favour of the third respondent.

Let's wait for SCOK's answer to 22.3 and then try and read the tea leaves to guide us as to who did it, or who masterminded it.

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

I think you're still making the leap/assumption. Look, Uhuru or Raila are not the only persons with interests deep enough to motivate interference in a process like that. Without some more evidence, an assumption like that would be unwarranted even though common sense tells you to make it. Imagine the hypothetical example where a powerful cartel stands to gain or lose big should Uhuru or Raila win and they decide to take matters into their own hands to manipulate the result either way and ensure their preferred outcome. If a court assumed that only Uhuru/Raila could have done so in that instance, it would be assuming falsely. Also, please understand that there is a difference between what parties claim and what the court does.

The bold.  I think there is legal term for it, but I am a little shallow there.  Something that describes a court that is inquisitive and can make new findings - on the basis of evidence before it - that are not necessarily in the pleadings vs a court that only deals with the prayers before it.

Ok found it.  I think the legal terms are inquisitorial vs adversarial.  They are usually associated with different legal systems, but they can be used occasionally in the same legal system(in this case common law).

In the inquisitorial approach, the judges can look at the evidence and discover another crime.

[Kadame7]

I think you're still making the leap/assumption. Look, Uhuru or Raila are not the only persons with interests deep enough to motivate interference in a process like that. Without some more evidence, an assumption like that would be unwarranted even though common sense tells you to make it. Imagine the hypothetical example where a powerful cartel stands to gain or lose big should Uhuru or Raila win and they decide to take matters into their own hands to manipulate the result either way and ensure their preferred outcome. If a court assumed that only Uhuru/Raila could have done so in that instance, it would be assuming falsely. Also, please understand that there is a difference between what parties claim and what the court does.

The bold.  I think there is legal term for it, but I am a little shallow there.  Something that describes a court that is inquisitive and can make new findings - on the basis of evidence before it - that are not necessarily in the pleadings vs a court that only deals with the prayers before it.

Ok found it.  I think the legal terms are inquisitorial vs adversarial.  They are usually associated with different legal systems, but they can be used occasionally in the same legal system(in this case common law).

In the inquisitorial approach, the judges can look at the evidence and discover another crime.

Ah, I see. That's not what I was referring to. I meant: the framing of claims by NASA can't make the court find wrong-doing by anyone. The court will do that based on sufficient evidence for the finding, which would be a factual one in this case and not a legal one.

[Kadame7]

In 2013, Caroli Omondi stole the money which was supposed to pay the agents. Nothing was done.

Finding out who own the "rag" is completely avoiding the internal problems NASA experienced during 8.8 and will most likely, yet again, experience on 17.10.

For sure NASA needs to revamp its organization. Everyone I've spoken to complains about their happless disorganization.

[Kadame7]

It's actually possible for NASWA to plant rigging evidence in favour of Jubilee just to dig it out in court. NASWA did it but  the mathematical additions are in favour of the third respondent.

This is why I was saying the court can't make those assumptions even if they seem obvious to us in a commonsensical way. We don't have to justify all our findings in a reasoned judgment, but they do.

[MOON Ki]

In 2013, Caroli Omondi stole the money which was supposed to pay the agents. Nothing was done.

Finding out who own the "rag" is completely avoiding the internal problems NASA experienced during 8.8 and will most likely, yet again, experience on 17.10.

I can't comment on what will happen on 17 Oct; I have no idea.   But I do know that in terms of organization Raila, for whatever reason, has been unable or unwilling to learn any lessons from 2013.   Still, who knows; perhaps he will surprise us in the next few weeks.  Maybe Omollo and friends will lead the wake-up call that is surely sorely needed.

[Empedocles]

In 2013, Caroli Omondi stole the money which was supposed to pay the agents. Nothing was done.

Finding out who own the "rag" is completely avoiding the internal problems NASA experienced during 8.8 and will most likely, yet again, experience on 17.10.

I can't comment on what will happen on 17 Oct; I have no idea.   But I do know that in terms of organization Raila, for whatever reason, has been unable or unwilling to learn any lessons from 2013.   Still, who knows; perhaps he will surprise us in the next few weeks.  Maybe Omollo and friends will lead the wake-up call that is surely sorely needed.

I doubt anything will change. I still recall Orengo's words to Ranneberger, about Raila being a poor manager who surrounds himself with incompetent people.

I don't understand how Raila thinks. I mean, beating Uhuru shouldn't be that hard at all, even if the NASA consensus is that Uhuru wouldn't hand over power.

A properly organized NASA (without i.e. a constantly disappearing Kalonzo) would be unbeatable in my opinion.