Dissenting Opinions of Njoki and Ojwang

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

Turnout in central was the highest, generally toying with the limits of possibility.  Numbers you only see in countries with mandatory voting.  I am on a phone so I can't share the spreadsheet.

The results in PDF
https://www.iebc.or.ke/uploads/resources/m3f8arLNjp.pdf

And in Excel
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B2rMMQJiqMB8ZUlyd05MbmIwOGM/edit?usp=docslist_api&filetype=msexcel

Of course it was not low,but not substantially higher than national average

Wait, on second thought it was very high. Approaching 90%

Thanks, that spreadhseet has apostrophes and needs cleansing before delving in.  I'll do it later when I get to a bigger screen.  Assuming that turnout was as you say 90%, and Uhuru and co still needed to stuff the ballots, then his 70%+1 is just load of bull. 

Next time rigging will be very tricky.

This is why he's driving around hurling abuse.  Chap knows his goose is cooked.  Worse so now that he's been caught stealing.

These turnout records are OK - 86% max. They are higher in Jubilee which appears to explain the now invalid 54%. No county or constituency has 100% turnout. I am still waiting to see the stuffed polling stations list from someone... - Windy?

I don't know about any stuffed polling stations.   I also doubt turnouts in the 80% ranges are true.

The thing that does it for me though.  Where the hell were those portal numbers coming from?  They certainly weren't coming from the polling stations.  It's almost a month and IEBC has not demonstrated a single transmission's full life cycle.  Just one transmission with source, destination and times.  In my books that's incriminating.

Unless someone erased the evidence on the server.  But such an act itself also demands suspension of belief in this process or any of its fruit.  These numbers no longer tell us anything meaningful.  Vifaranga vya computer seems appropriate.

I have no idea exactly what happened or how.  But IEBC or someone with ties to it tried to pull a fast one on us. 

[Nefertiti]

Robina,
The idea is if turnout was higher in Central than the 'average', the excess was stuffed ballots.

This is just NASA propaganda... just like Jubilee claims that a majority in parliament proves they won the presidency. High turnout is not rigging.

[Nefertiti]

The fact the 34As were forged, tells us that the original counts were suppressed and possibly destroyed.  This is further explained by the hackers that deleted 34As off the servers.  Someone was on a clean up of evidence.

Additional ballots or counts of ballots were introduced to create the "winning" margin and put it beyond contention.   We need access to the evidence that nasa put forward.  The other clue is the bitter opposition that ngatia and muite had of Orengos IT report.  Nasa need to release it in full.  It must have had gems in it.

Does anyone have this report? I would love to see it. I mean the real one from the registrar - not Jubilee or NASA propaganda material.

[vooke]

The fact the 34As were forged, tells us that the original counts were suppressed and possibly destroyed.  This is further explained by the hackers that deleted 34As off the servers.  Someone was on a clean up of evidence.

Additional ballots or counts of ballots were introduced to create the "winning" margin and put it beyond contention.   We need access to the evidence that nasa put forward.  The other clue is the bitter opposition that ngatia and muite had of Orengos IT report.  Nasa need to release it in full.  It must have had gems in it.

Does anyone have this report? I would love to see it. I mean the real one from the registrar - not Jubilee or NASA propaganda material.

There
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B2rMMQJiqMB8WEdvRURHbEoxVVU

[vooke]

Robina,
The idea is if turnout was higher in Central than the 'average', the excess was stuffed ballots.

This is just NASA propaganda... just like Jubilee claims that a majority in parliament proves they won the presidency. High turnout is not rigging.

Yeah,maybe we should aks them what they deem to be 'normal' turnout before the rerun. It's a hunch-feeling thing

Migori,Homabay turnout for instance is virtually indistinguishable from Kiambu.

In fact if you removed the names of the constituencies,the 'skeptical' ones here can't tell the results apart

[bryan275]

The fact the 34As were forged, tells us that the original counts were suppressed and possibly destroyed.  This is further explained by the hackers that deleted 34As off the servers.  Someone was on a clean up of evidence.

Additional ballots or counts of ballots were introduced to create the "winning" margin and put it beyond contention.   We need access to the evidence that nasa put forward.  The other clue is the bitter opposition that ngatia and muite had of Orengos IT report.  Nasa need to release it in full.  It must have had gems in it.

Does anyone have this report? I would love to see it. I mean the real one from the registrar - not Jubilee or NASA propaganda material.

The fact the 34As were forged, tells us that the original counts were suppressed and possibly destroyed.  This is further explained by the hackers that deleted 34As off the servers.  Someone was on a clean up of evidence.

Additional ballots or counts of ballots were introduced to create the "winning" margin and put it beyond contention.   We need access to the evidence that nasa put forward.  The other clue is the bitter opposition that ngatia and muite had of Orengos IT report.  Nasa need to release it in full.  It must have had gems in it.

Does anyone have this report? I would love to see it. I mean the real one from the registrar - not Jubilee or NASA propaganda material.

Vooke availed the real one last Tuesday.  He might still  have links to it.  I suspect orengos was even more detailed and that they should be read together.

[Nefertiti]

NASA presented something like 5,000 of their own agents copies to the court. That we have not seen them on nipate does not mean they don't exist. And while we are at it, why would anyone resort to unauthorized forms after they had been issued proper forms, and to the tune of thousands? Why would anyone risk contempt charges rather than permit access to the servers? What were they afraid of? The log copies they gave already showed unauthorized access and delition of forms, and the fact that the polling stations never communicated with IEBC server but that all uploads happened from 277 places...that reminds me of the "Omolloesque" remote voting charges that were ridiculed on this board for endless weeks. Robina, you say you are objective but you arent. You have a position: there was no rigging, and from that you are setting the standards of proof that would be acceptable to you. It is an ok position but it is a position on one side, just like Bryan's. (And mine) Its not neutral.

Yes Kadame, Robina's stand is that the elections were flawed not rigged. That the flaws have not been proven to favor either Uhuru or Raila which would be rigging. That Uhuru was absolved of wrongdoing which he would not have been if rigging in his favor was found. This is mostly based on what the court said. When the court releases further details I might change my mind.

This is my opinion obviously. If you have a whiff of those 5K forms of Orengo... that would be nice to share.

About IEBC's/Chiloba's criminal intents - the fraud/incompetence/etc - forging forms, botching gadgets and deleting records - how does this prove rigging? How do I even know who or what motivated them? Most people have concluded this is Uhuru's dirty work because he is the incumbent and was declared winner. Not me. Such ideas are subjective I think. I chose to rely on the neutral court in the absence of alternative convincing evidence.

[MOON Ki]

Looking at our constitutional definition of free and fair, it is quite possible that Uhuru's 54% was real. For instance, transparency alone is enough to call an election not free and fair. But that's is not to mean a candidate padded their votes. Accurate means his real votes were +/- 54%. Neutral may or may not affect a candidate's performance...and so forth.

Maraga (and Babu of course) had better pray that whatever ways the election fell short of constitutional and electoral laws principles,Uhuru's REAL votes were way less than 54%, else he will be another crack judge who wasted Kenya's two months.

Sigh.   Let me give it one more short.    Of course, it is possible that Uhuru's 54% was real.   It is even possible that without the "problems" Uhuru's votes might have been 74%.   Likewise, it is possible that Raila's votes were actually 55% .... or they could have been 77%.  Pick whatever numbers you like. 

A core part of the judgement seems to be that the process was so f**ked up that the numbers don't mean anything; that's way a repeat had been ordered.    Put another way, we don't if the 54% was real; so we'll have another go at it.   The results in Round 2 might "show" that the 54% was real; but that would not alter the fact that in Round 1 things were so bad that we did not know.   

You can come up with alternative numbers and possibilities (for Round 1), such as those I have given above, but they will not change the fact the we have no way of knowing.

Rails need to pray, as he hopes to win the next round.    Maraga is in a different position: I understand that he is a devout Christian, so I imagine he already prayed hard to be guided in his actions.   And he probably feels that he had divine guidance even as he adhered to man's law.   What should be now be praying for?

[bryan275]

Robina,
The idea is if turnout was higher in Central than the 'average', the excess was stuffed ballots.

This is just NASA propaganda... just like Jubilee claims that a majority in parliament proves they won the presidency. High turnout is not rigging.

Yeah,maybe we should aks them what they deem to be 'normal' turnout before the rerun. It's a hunch-feeling thing

My argument on turnout is that if turnout was maxed out before the rig, then it is unlikely that they'd be able to top their current performance.  100% however is suspect in any society

[bryan275]

My position is that jubilee needn't have stuffed ballots had they had the numbers. 

True, but did he stuff ballots?
That's an assumption.

 And my point is,while all irregularities and illegalities are wrong, the most important ones are those that suppress or outrightly rob your opponent of their genuine votes while padding yours.

Babu couldn't care less if the results were recorded on a serviette so long as he got his votes, but he'd be worried stiff if his votes were stolen before being recorded on form 34A with currency-grade security features.

The fact the 34As were forged, tells us that the original counts were suppressed and possibly destroyed.  This is further explained by the hackers that deleted 34As off the servers.  Someone was on a clean up of evidence.

Additional ballots or counts of ballots were introduced to create the "winning" margin and put it beyond contention.   We need access to the evidence that nasa put forward.  The other clue is the bitter opposition that ngatia and muite had of Orengos IT report.  Nasa need to release it in full.  It must have had gems in it.

bryan,

I am waiting for Maraga's detailed ruling but I don't believe this story from the information available currently. If the forms were forged, why does NASA not have a single photo/image (taken by phone/camera) of the original unforged forms? Those would surely prove rigging. Omollo tells us that NASA agents did not take a single photo because they were afraid of Matiang'i. Imagine that - despite the presence of local  & international media & observers - NASA agents were too scared to do their job - to take a single photo of the legit results that were later forged. 11K of those. However they were not too scared to append their signatures to the forgeries  Something is really flawed about this explanation. It is at this point that I grew cold feet about NASA's claims.

The detailed ruling will tell us if the deep flaws were due to rigging or incompetence or whatever - hopefully too in whose favor.

Sawa.  Also I recommend that you watch Norwojees submissions to the supreme court.  It dwelt on specifically the 11k 34As that were unavailable for days.  I suspect that are the ones that were doctored to fit the rigged numbers. 

[vooke]

Looking at our constitutional definition of free and fair, it is quite possible that Uhuru's 54% was real. For instance, transparency alone is enough to call an election not free and fair. But that's is not to mean a candidate padded their votes. Accurate means his real votes were +/- 54%. Neutral may or may not affect a candidate's performance...and so forth.

Maraga (and Babu of course) had better pray that whatever ways the election fell short of constitutional and electoral laws principles,Uhuru's REAL votes were way less than 54%, else he will be another crack judge who wasted Kenya's two months.

Sigh.   Let me give it one more short.    Of course, it is possible that Uhuru's 54% was real.   It is even possible that without the "problems" Uhuru's votes might have been 74%.   Likewise, it is possible that Raila's votes were actually 55% .... or they could have been 77%.  Pick whatever numbers you like. 

A core part of the judgement seems to be that the process was so f**ked up that the numbers don't mean anything; that's way a repeat had been ordered.    Put another way, we don't if the 54% was real; so we'll have another go at it.   The results in Round 2 might "show" that the 54% was real; but that would not alter the fact that in Round 1 things were so bad that we did not know.   

You can come up with alternative numbers and possibilities (for Round 1), such as those I have given above, but they will not change the fact the we have no way of knowing.

Rails need to pray, as he hopes to win the next round.    Maraga is in a different position: I understand that he is a devout Christian, so I imagine he already prayed hard to be guided in his actions.   And he probably feels that he had divine guidance even as he adhered to man's law.   What should be now be praying for?

I understood you the first time. The point is if the ruling was based on cosmetic aspects of the election, it was a waste of time like say legalizing gay unions in the middle of Turkana with thousands facing starvation.

Uhuru's victory in the rerun means Maraga overestimated the extent and impact of these irregularities and illegalities on the expression of the will of the people which is what the constitution envisions and the whole point of invalidation.

The decision is solid and will be quoted for many years and in many jurisdictions,but so would be its practical implications here. Babu victory is good for the decision,Uhuru win is very bad. Maraga plus his conscience plus grasp of the evidence at hand exaggerated

[Nefertiti]

My argument on turnout is that if turnout was maxed out before the rig, then it is unlikely that they'd be able to top their current performance.  100% however is suspect in any society

Please expound. Sorry it's a slow morning.

[vooke]

My argument on turnout is that if turnout was maxed out before the rig, then it is unlikely that they'd be able to top their current performance.  100% however is suspect in any society

You're right. But I don't know what makes you believe that turn out in the rerun would be higher than before. Baba already said this was his last stab and they gave their best. But we never had 100% or even 90% nowhere

[MOON Ki]

I understood you the first time. The point is if the ruling was based on cosmetic aspects of the election, it was a waste of time like say legalizing gay unions in the middle of Turkana with thousands facing starvation.

Uhuru's victory in the rerun means Maraga overestimated the extent and impact of these irregularities and illegalities on the expression of the will of the people which is what the constitution envisions and the whole point of invalidation.

You still keep repeating the same argument, in different forms.  Yes, let's wait and see it.   

Uhuru's victory in a re-run cannot reverse time and alter what Maraga knew or did not know at the time of the judgement.

[vooke]

I understood you the first time. The point is if the ruling was based on cosmetic aspects of the election, it was a waste of time like say legalizing gay unions in the middle of Turkana with thousands facing starvation.

Uhuru's victory in the rerun means Maraga overestimated the extent and impact of these irregularities and illegalities on the expression of the will of the people which is what the constitution envisions and the whole point of invalidation.

You still keep repeating the same argument, in different forms.  Yes, let's wait and see it.   

Uhuru's victory in a re-run cannot reverse time and alter what Maraga knew or did not know at the time of the judgement.

I used if because it is all conditioned on the outcome.

It's true you can't rewrite history but a repeat election days later minus the so called irregularities and illegalities is the best test of SCOK's reasoning. The judgement is testable and will be tested shortly

[Kadame7]

I understood you the first time. The point is if the ruling was based on cosmetic aspects of the election, it was a waste of time like say legalizing gay unions in the middle of Turkana with thousands facing starvation.

Uhuru's victory in the rerun means Maraga overestimated the extent and impact of these irregularities and illegalities on the expression of the will of the people which is what the constitution envisions and the whole point of invalidation.

You still keep repeating the same argument, in different forms.  Yes, let's wait and see it.   

Uhuru's victory in a re-run cannot reverse time and alter what Maraga knew or did not know at the time of the judgement.

I've given up on this one too. If a process is so botched that you cant tell what outcome is real, it doesnt mean that you are claimin there is no outcome. It just means that you are saying: I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER. DO IT AGAIN SO I KNOW THE RIGHT ANSWER! When you do find the right answer, how that is supposed to rubish your need to know the right answer is beyond me. Its not logic vooke is employing here. He is used to testing prophets and their prophecies (and MOAS) with future outcomes that he is employing that methodology where it makes not one iota of sense. Its like how when you have a harmer all problems start looking like nails

[vooke]

Invalidation seems to have been based on some subjective grounds probably explaining the dissenting opinions so you can't divorce invalidation from the repeat because that's where it'll be tested.

[Kichwa]

So says you. That is why they have seven justices.  Most of the court decisions are subjective/objective.  The "reasonable man" is a subjective/Objective" test. Objective in that any reasonable man similarly situated in that jurisdiction would arrive at a similar decision but subjective in that a reasonable man in another jurisdiction may not neccessarily arrive at the same answer.

Invalidation seems to have been based on some subjective grounds probably explaining the dissenting opinions so you can't divorce invalidation from the repeat because that's where it'll be tested.

[vooke]

So says you. That is why they have seven justices.  Most of the court decisions are subjective/objective.  The "reasonable man" is a subjective/Objective" test. Objective in that any reasonable man similarly situated in that jurisdiction would arrive at a similar decision but subjective in that a reasonable man in another jurisdiction may not neccessarily arrive at the same answer.

Invalidation seems to have been based on some subjective grounds probably explaining the dissenting opinions so you can't divorce invalidation from the repeat because that's where it'll be tested.

It was anything but unanimous. No problem with that,and that's why I defer to the rerun to see who was right.

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

So says you. That is why they have seven justices.  Most of the court decisions are subjective/objective.  The "reasonable man" is a subjective/Objective" test. Objective in that any reasonable man similarly situated in that jurisdiction would arrive at a similar decision but subjective in that a reasonable man in another jurisdiction may not neccessarily arrive at the same answer.

Invalidation seems to have been based on some subjective grounds probably explaining the dissenting opinions so you can't divorce invalidation from the repeat because that's where it'll be tested.

It was anything but unanimous. No problem with that,and that's why I defer to the rerun to see who was right.

The only test of this ruling is if we are able to verify and vouch for the subsequent winner.  And even that does not necessarily invalidate it.  The ruling I have seen talks about integrity, not outcome.