Njoki Ndungu LIED on the Bench

[Kadame10]

I don't brag - as of class 2 I knew I had a special brain.My advice - go to facebook and make bimbo remarks - otherwise take my advice - read up on election laws,regulations and petition proceedings..before you waste more of my time. Being obstinate while pushing nonsense and seeking support from fellow NASArites is not what I do.

So we observers are supposed to replace the trial court where this should have been adduced, challenged and the court made its finding after all that? Stop bragging about your brain and hurling insults. Chema chajiuza baba. That dilemma on nipate is what the entire litigation process is intended to avoid.

With bimbos like you here, I think I'll stay. I'm in good company. Now, who sought support? Is that yet another link you can't produce?

[RV Pundit]

Nobody is here to buy your rotten fish. How would you know if Njoki improperly introduced evidence when you have not have a look at rules and regulation guiding her on presidenital election petition and have never read election act?

Election act says she get furnished with form 34s immediately Raila filled her petition.You think they were for wrapping fish and chips during the election petition hearing?

No one cares two cents what you think about your own "scholarship", IQ, or brain size. Get that through your damn mind. Just argue your points. I sell fish for a living and dropped out in standard two, mkay? Still doesn't make your claims any less wrong.

[Kadame10]

Nobody is here to buy your rotten fish. How would you know if Njoki improperly introduced evidence when you have not have a look at rules and regulation guiding her on presidenital election and have never read election act?

No one cares two cents what you think about your own "scholarship", IQ, or brain size. Get that through your damn mind. Just argue your points. I sell fish for a living and dropped out in standard two, mkay? Still doesn't make your claims any less wrong.

That you think that question is answered outside the laws of evidence ie Evidence Act/ common law case law on evidence says it all.

[RV Pundit]

Which is why I said the only think you know is generic court proceedings. This is an election petition with special rules. Read them and stop embarrassing yourself.

That you think that question is answered outside the laws of evidence ie Evidence Act/ common law case law on evidence says it all.

[vooke]

[Omollo]

You are the biggest moron around here.

Thanks again for helping our resident moron. This was part of the amendments introduced last year.

I recall asking seven times before vooke posted something. If you are so clever why didn't you provide the evidence without me having to follow and brow beat you?

Looks like IEBC only surrenders the certified copies of forms 34A,34B,and 34C once a Petition is filed

Not true. The candidates have a right under the IEBC regulations. The refusal/ failure to deliver the same was one of the grounds for the adverse finding.

[RV Pundit]

Hehehe. I don't do your homework. I told your 4 days after petition is filled IEBC are required to provide form 34s to SCOK. Where was I wrong.  You see unlike you I have huge memory - so I read this long time ago and I remember it. I just don't have the time to go looking it for you. I gave you all the hints...election act as ammended.

You are the biggest moron around here.

Thanks again for helping our resident moron. This was part of the amendments introduced last year.

I recall asking seven times before vooke posted something. If you are so clever why didn't you provide the evidence without me having to follow and brow beat you?

Looks like IEBC only surrenders the certified copies of forms 34A,34B,and 34C once a Petition is filed

Not true. The candidates have a right under the IEBC regulations. The refusal/ failure to deliver the same was one of the grounds for the adverse finding.

[Kadame10]

Which is why I said the only think you know is generic court proceedings. This is an election petition with special rules. Read them and stop embarrassing yourself.

That you think that question is answered outside the laws of evidence ie Evidence Act/ common law case law on evidence says it all.

You think electoral laws change fundamental rules of evidence built into all litigation. You don't have to pretend to know everything, you know. No one is required to know everything under the sun.

[RV Pundit]

So you think evidence act applies to all court proceedings - civil or criminal - leave alone petition ones? Please just admit you don't have the time to research because you're busy with your masters or the church...but of course you must spend the whole day imputing improper motive on Njoki. Njoki who as you saw - did her homework in law schools - so much they sent her abroad immediately she was done.

You think electoral laws change fundamental rules of evidence built into all litigation. You don't have to pretend everything, you know. No one is required to know everything under the sun.

[Kadame10]

So you think evidence act applies to all court proceedings - civil or criminal - leave alone petition ones? Please just admit you don't have the time to do because you're busy with your masters or the church...but of course you must spend the whole day imputing improper motive on Njoki. Njoki who as you saw - did her homework in law schools - so much they sent her abroad immediately she was done.

You think electoral laws change fundamental rules of evidence built into all litigation. You don't have to pretend everything, you know. No one is required to know everything under the sun.

YES!!!!  Rules of evidence determine how you decide that a fact is a fact.

Sure I'm busy writing a phD but that doesn't mean I can't comment. okay?

[vooke]

Not true. The candidates have a right under the IEBC regulations. The refusal/ failure to deliver the same was one of the grounds for the adverse finding.

[Omollo]

As a judge hers is limited to analyzing the evidence presented before the court in plenary. She shall not aid either side. The matter had been canvassed through affidavits and oral responses in court.

The court had REJECTED Orengo's document with sumarries of the examination of the forms and equally Orengo objected to Ngatia offering evidence on the same. The judges were therefore bound by the evidence available. Just like 2013 the Judges had the forms but Njoki did not set aside 22 hours to go through each one having thrown away the affidavit introducing the evidence.

Similarly the affidavits introducing the IT evidence was thrown out on application.

Unless she was going to testify in court, she could not examine the forms or any primary evidence. Her so called findings must be tested by others especially the parties involved or who may suffer from her activism.

The most she could do was to bring her concerns to the entire court which if it had time could order a review of the report.

I simply do not believe that Jubilee and IEBC agents watched in silence as a report made claims about those forms then went ahead and apended their signatures to the report! I have a lot of respect for Ngatia (for reasons I can't disclose). He could never stand in court to say his side agreed to a report that he clearly knew to be false! Was he sabotaging Uhuru Kenyatta?

You are telling us that Kenyatta's advocates joined the IEBC and NASA to betray him! 

The Civil Procedure provides for the process of admission of evidence.

[RV Pundit]

Why do PHD when your attitude toward scholarship is generally contemptuous. I hope it something religious - your passion for pastoral work is unparalleled I must admit. It would be a shame if you were to end in academia and nurture more people like you. I mean I am geek  but I take the trouble to understand shiet.

YES!!!!  Rules of evidence determine how you decide that a fact is a fact.

Sure I'm busy writing a phD but that doesn't mean I can't comment. okay?

[Kadame10]

Why do PHD when your attitude toward scholarship is generally contemptuous. I hope it something religious - your passion for pastoral work is unparalleled I must admit. It would be a shame if you were to end in academia and nurture more people like you. I mean I am geek  but I take the trouble to understand shiet.

YES!!!!  Rules of evidence determine how you decide that a fact is a fact.

Sure I'm busy writing a phD but that doesn't mean I can't comment. okay?

Like how you took trouble to learn ALL the applicable laws in litigation besides the elections acts and regulations? I'm studying people who need to constantly advertise that they are cleverer than everyone else all the time. Its interesting.

[RV Pundit]

Omollo - Raila petition say the form is cooked. IEBC and Uhuru say it's not cooked. How better to resolve this than examine the forms that law provide to her.Or what was intention of giving her those forms ?. Isn't that why judges order for ballots to be re-opened and recounted in their presence?

The problem only arises because there is HUGE DESCREPANCY - both processes -Njokis and registar - should have yielded the same results.

Obviously somebody planted fakes in IEBC. The certified copies are either faked or the original faked.

As a judge hers is limited to analyzing the evidence presented before the court in plenary. She shall not aid either side. The matter had been canvassed through affidavits and oral responses in court.

The court had REJECTED Orengo's document with sumarries of the examination of the forms and equally Orengo objected to Ngatia offering evidence on the same. The judges were therefore bound by the evidence available. Just like 2013 the Judges had the forms but Njoki did not set aside 22 hours to go through each one having thrown away the affidavit introducing the evidence.

Similarly the affidavits introducing the IT evidence was thrown out on application.

Unless she was going to testify in court, she could not examine the forms or any primary evidence. Her so called findings must be tested by others especially the parties involved or who may suffer from her activism.

The most she could do was to bring her concerns to the entire court which if it had time could order a review of the report.

I simply do not believe that Jubilee and IEBC agents watched in silence as a report made claims about those forms then went ahead and apended their signatures to the report! I have a lot of respect for Ngatia (for reasons I can't disclose). He could never stand in court to say his side agreed to a report that he clearly knew to be false! Was he sabotaging Uhuru Kenyatta?

You are telling us that Kenyatta's advocates joined the IEBC and NASA to betray him! 

The Civil Procedure provides for the process of admission of evidence.

[RV Pundit]

I do as hobby and on need basis. I read Prof Ojwang tort law tutorial when I was 17yr old waiting to join campus. If am going to comment on ICC - international crimes - I do the neccessary reading otherwise I keep off. The same with elections related matters. You come here with your ignorance and LOLS - and end up wasting everyone time. Omollo at least knows what he is talking about - a little shabby but not ignorant.

Like how you took trouble to learn ALL the applicable laws in litigation besides the elections acts and regulations? I'm studying people who need to constantly advertise that they are cleverer than everyone else all the time. Its interesting.

[vooke]

As a judge hers is limited to analyzing the evidence presented before the court in plenary. She shall not aid either side. The matter had been canvassed through affidavits and oral responses in court.

The court had REJECTED Orengo's document with sumarries of the examination of the forms and equally Orengo objected to Ngatia offering evidence on the same. The judges were therefore bound by the evidence available. Just like 2013 the Judges had the forms but Njoki did not set aside 22 hours to go through each one having thrown away the affidavit introducing the evidence.

Similarly the affidavits introducing the IT evidence was thrown out on application.

Unless she was going to testify in court, she could not examine the forms or any primary evidence. Her so called findings must be tested by others especially the parties involved or who may suffer from her activism.

The most she could do was to bring her concerns to the entire court which if it had time could order a review of the report.

I simply do not believe that Jubilee and IEBC agents watched in silence as a report made claims about those forms then went ahead and apended their signatures to the report! I have a lot of respect for Ngatia (for reasons I can't disclose). He could never stand in court to say his side agreed to a report that he clearly knew to be false! Was he sabotaging Uhuru Kenyatta?

You are telling us that Kenyatta's advocates joined the IEBC and NASA to betray him! 

The Civil Procedure provides for the process of admission of evidence.

[Kadame10]

I do as hobby and on need basis. I read Prof Ojwang tort law tutorial when I was 17yr old waiting to join campus. If am going to comment on ICC - international crimes - I do the neccessary reading otherwise I keep off. The same with elections related matters. You come here with your ignorance and LOLS - and end up wasting everyone time. Omollo at least knows what he is talking about - a little shabby but not ignorant.

Like how you took trouble to learn ALL the applicable laws in litigation besides the elections acts and regulations? I'm studying people who need to constantly advertise that they are cleverer than everyone else all the time. Its interesting.

You just boldly claimed the law of evidence doesn't apply to all, criminal/civil. Dude. Don't be talking about ignorance. You are its poster child. I don't pretend to know what I don't know, okay? And I don't die from being wrong. And I don't need to read all laws to know basics about how litigation is conducted. These are fundamental rules built into all litigation to ensure fairness to all parties. Don't try to hang on Omollo's coat tails after insulting him all over the place. It makes you look pathetic. You don't even understand what he is saying and why evidence cannot be sprung in a judgment.

[Omollo]

The IEBC and Uhuru never said that. They both variously admitted the stated errors but provided an explanation. You claimed to have read Kassait's affidavit.

The court ordered an examination with the agreement of the parties. A report thereof was presented to the court on it last day. Both parties tried to enter their own report but faced mutual objections. It was agreed that the Registrars report prepared by ALL the parties recording their objections would be used.

Now explain to me why Uhuru's agent would agree with the Registrar but Ndung'u disagrees with both? Did Uhuru's agents turn against him?

However there is no magic! Njoki decided to accept the explanations and even provided her own. She for example COMPLETELY rejected the idea of forgeries. Thus even that exercise book Form 34A is good enough for her. She saw a serial number written by hand, saw a barcode (probably drawn and she did not read it by scanning) and she saw a stamp and it did not matter whether it was the official issued stamp or one made in Kondele or Kibuye!

Why?

This has two purposes:

1. To lend credence to any extra legal measures Uhuru might choose to avoid elections or to keep power
2. To lay the ground for the lower courts to defy the SCOK and protect his "majority" in parliament against 339 petitions!

Omollo - Raila petition say the form is cooked. IEBC and Uhuru say it's not cooked. How better to resolve this than examine the forms that law provide to her.Or what was intention of giving her those forms ?. Isn't that why judges order for ballots to be re-opened and recounted in their presence?

The problem only arises because there is HUGE DESCREPANCY - both processes -Njokis and registar - should have yielded the same results.

Obviously somebody planted fakes in IEBC. The certified copies are either faked or the original faked.

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

As a judge hers is limited to analyzing the evidence presented before the court in plenary. She shall not aid either side. The matter had been canvassed through affidavits and oral responses in court.

The court had REJECTED Orengo's document with sumarries of the examination of the forms and equally Orengo objected to Ngatia offering evidence on the same. The judges were therefore bound by the evidence available. Just like 2013 the Judges had the forms but Njoki did not set aside 22 hours to go through each one having thrown away the affidavit introducing the evidence.

Similarly the affidavits introducing the IT evidence was thrown out on application.

Unless she was going to testify in court, she could not examine the forms or any primary evidence. Her so called findings must be tested by others especially the parties involved or who may suffer from her activism.

The most she could do was to bring her concerns to the entire court which if it had time could order a review of the report.

I simply do not believe that Jubilee and IEBC agents watched in silence as a report made claims about those forms then went ahead and apended their signatures to the report! I have a lot of respect for Ngatia (for reasons I can't disclose). He could never stand in court to say his side agreed to a report that he clearly knew to be false! Was he sabotaging Uhuru Kenyatta?

You are telling us that Kenyatta's advocates joined the IEBC and NASA to betray him! 

The Civil Procedure provides for the process of admission of evidence.

One would have to believe that Paul Muite, IEBCs own lawyer, missed the issue.  Does that mean the evidence was tampered with after the case? - I wish I could put it past these thugs.  Njoki should be packing her bags on her way out of that court already.  She is taking up the space of someone more competent with more integrity.