*NEW* Login or register using your Facebook account.
Not a member? Join the fastest growing conservative community!
Membership is free and takes 15 seconds
CLICK HERE or use Facebook to login or register ---->
  |
|
Page 2 of 2
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
|
 Posted: Tue May 22, 2012 5:40 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
I just think appealing would look bad on him and the government, especially if it goes to Supreme Court and they agree with the judges ruling.
I read somewhere that the Supreme Court likely won't look at the appeal, but I don't know how likely that is. |
|
|
|
 |
|
| Posted: Wed May 23, 2012 9:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Progressive Tory wrote: | I just think appealing would look bad on him and the government, especially if it goes to Supreme Court and they agree with the judges ruling.
I read somewhere that the Supreme Court likely won't look at the appeal, but I don't know how likely that is. |
I think the optics are largely conversation at this point;
Most instances which we have seen that involve election results, elections Canada, etc normally end up going all the way through the entire judicial process.
There needs to be a second look at the process the judge went through in order to deem some of these ballots irregular, not because I feel his is necessary wrong but because this is too important a process for one judge to decide.
Justice Lederer decision contains the word "if" and "may" far to many times for my liking;
The issue with the 78 ballots is not that they voted illegally, but that elections Canada did not do their due diligence in the paperwork, and if they were unable to vote in the riding it may have effected the outcome.
The text of the ruling was:
| Quote: | | If people who are not qualified to vote were permitted to do so, or if there is a concern that people may have been permitted to vote more than once, confidence in our electoral process will fade," Lederer wrote. |
While I agree with the general sentiment; I would at a minimum like the evidence reviewed by a second court and conclude that his logic pertaining to those ballots is correct.
If folks did in fact vote twice, that is election fraud and something that can be proven by the same name appearing on a voter list twice at the same or different polling stations and to the best of my knowledge no one has been charged with election fraud within the riding which leads to me wonder why this decision is being made on the grounds that wrong doing may have occurred, rather then the grounds that it did. |
|
|
|
|
RCO
Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 1896
  
votes: 2
Location: Ontario
|
| Posted: Thu May 24, 2012 9:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
any news on an appeal ?
i'm starting to think they should appeal especially after seeing the defeated liberal mp on tonights news trying to claim there was fraud in the riding and conservatives to blame . especially after the judge said there was no evidence of fraud just elections canada did not keep proper track of some voters or get proper id . |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri May 25, 2012 6:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
Today is the last day to appeal isn't it?
Edit:
Monday is. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon May 28, 2012 8:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Opitz has appealed. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon May 28, 2012 11:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yep;
They had a conference call this morning detailing their reasoning for the appeal;
| Quote: | Ted Opitz is appealing to the Supreme Court of Canada to uphold the 2011 federal election result in his Toronto riding.
On May 18, an Ontario Superior Court judge found sufficient voting irregularities to cast doubt on the credibility of last year's voting process in Etobicoke Centre and declared it null and void, leading to an automatic byelection unless the decision was appealed within eight days.
The margin of victory in the riding was only 26 votes. Justice Thomas Lederer set aside 79 ballots in his ruling.
Opitz was expected to appeal, and the Conservative MP issued a statement early Monday morning to make it official.
"This is the first time this section of the Elections Act has been considered by a court, and it is important that it be given the fullest consideration because of its significant impact on our democratic system," Opitz said in the press release, noting that the court made it very clear that there was no wrongdoing by any candidate. |
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politic.....preme.html
I certainly hope that the statement is not going to be the tact his legal team takes during the appeal, because if so we will be seeing a by-election shortly.
The appeal should be very simply grounded;
Justice Lederer set aside votes because of the way that Elections Canada handled the registration process and argued that irregularities "could" have occurred.
The argument I would be making is that "could" isn't a strong enough reasoning for the election result to be overturned.
The reality is that we have voter lists, we should be able to determine if a voter was registered twice and voted twice within the riding or within two different ridings and if that's the case that voter(s) broke the law and should be charged.
However we don't have any convictions of wrongdoing simply that the potential for wrongdoing was present due to a circumstance which was outside the control of any of the political parties or candidates.
If "potential" is enough, then I can think of a few other ridings in Toronto that should also find themselves in the same situation. |
|
|
|
|
RCO
Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 1896
votes: 2
Location: Ontario
|
| Posted: Mon May 28, 2012 1:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| i think an appeal is a good idea especially after the former mp without proof claimed wrong doing by the conservatives in the riding . if the result is throw out it needs to be made clear its because of elections canada errors not fraud by an indivdual candidate . the tories might not have appealed i suspect if not for liberals outburst last week in ottawa alleging fraud by the party . |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon May 28, 2012 3:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| RCO wrote: | | i think an appeal is a good idea especially after the former mp without proof claimed wrong doing by the conservatives in the riding . if the result is throw out it needs to be made clear its because of elections canada errors not fraud by an indivdual candidate . the tories might not have appealed i suspect if not for liberals outburst last week in ottawa alleging fraud by the party . |
I would still argue that if Elections Canada screwed up and allowed fraud by individual voters to occur there should still be a by-election.
However, the entire basis of the argument is that a crime may have been committed with malice by individuals which may have compromised the integrity of the election.
If a vote registered with a license that had an address out of the riding, but actually lived in the riding and had secondary evidence that they did in fact live in the riding (IE a utility bill etc) I don't consider that to be fraud, and considering that we have the election lists, it should be simply enough to chase down these votes which were disqualified and make a determination on the validity of the voter.
Was it sloppy paperwork by Elections Canada pertaining to a legitimate voter, or was it sloppy paperwork pertaining to one trying to commit fraud or vote several times and in several ridings?
If its the former, then discounting legitimate votes because of an Election Canada oversight is not grounds for a by-election, if its the latter then at a minimum why isn't the RCMP charging the individuals who did?
I don't think the Liberal grandstanding had much to do with the appeal;
I assumed there would be one regardless.
The Liberals continue to take the same route they have taken since the 2004 election, and they are polling at historic lows, they are hoping to latch onto an issue which they can gain some traction in so they dont walk into a leadership convention closer to the Greens then the NDP when it comes to national support and its hard to fault them for trying to do so. |
|
|
|
|
RCO
Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 1896
votes: 2
Location: Ontario
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 15, 2012 2:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Top court to hear Toronto riding election case in July
Ontario court ruled results of 2011 vote should be tossed due to voting irregularies
CBC News
Posted: Jun 14, 2012 9:33 PM ET
Last Updated: Jun 14, 2012 9:43 PM ET
Read 42 comments42
Conservative Ted Opitz, left, won the May 2011 election in Etobicoke Centre by 26 votes, but defeated Liberal Borys Wrzesnewskyj, right, challenged the results over voting irregularities. (Canadian Press)
Related Stories
Elections Canada raises new questions about Etobicoke voteToronto riding's election result tossed by judge
The Supreme Court of Canada plans to hold a one-day hearing July 10 to determine whether a new election should be held in the Toronto-area riding of Etobicoke Centre after an Ontario Superior Court judge found the results of the May 2011 federal election to be null and void.
The election was won by Conservative Ted Opitz by 26 votes, but his Liberal opponent, Borys Wrzesnewskyj, challenged the results over voting irregularities and managed to have the results tossed.
The judge found there were problems with the way Elections Canada ran the election, Conservative Party spokesman Fred Delorey said after the May 18 ruling. Wrzesnewskyj succeeded in proving that at least 79 votes shouldn't have been counted.
Opitz appealed the decision to the Supreme Court of Canada, which announced on Thursday that it would hold a special summer hearing.
Opitz had asked that the hearing be held in October, while Wrzesnewskyj had sought an earlier date.
On Tuesday, Wrzesnewskyj was nominated, unopposed, to represent the Liberals in Etobicoke Centre when the next federal vote is held in the riding.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/.....lenge.html |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 25, 2012 9:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politic.....entre.html
| Quote: | Liberal Borys Wrzesnewskyj is not waiting for the Supreme Court's decision before firing another volley in his battle over last year's election in Etobicoke Centre.
The court is expected to rule next week on whether Tory MP Ted Opitz can keep the seat which he won by just 26 votes. Either way, though, Wrzesnewskyj says "difficult questions" surround what he calls "problematic" new evidence presented to the court at the last minute by Elections Canada.
The former Liberal MP alleges that the agency failed to mention relevant facts which should have been disclosed to the justices. For example, he says, Elections Canada argued that many voters whose ballots were rejected by the lower court because of missing paperwork were really valid, because their names had since turned up on the voters' list |
What degree of incompetence does Election Canada need to display before there is a massive investigation into this agency?
We are in July 2012, Elections Canada is now after more then a year finally "finding" the documentation that shows that the votes the lower court threw out may actually be valid because those voters did in fact show up as registered voters in that riding after all?
Its been 14 months, and its been 14 months of imply that there was somehow wrongdoing or fraud that occurred in this riding?
Yet now when asked to present to the highest court Elections Canada finally finds the documents to lend legitimacy to more then half the votes which were tossed out by the lower courts?
Have I mentioned 14 months later...
| Quote: | Opitz appealed the ruling to the Supreme Court, which came back from its summer recess to hear the case. That's when Elections Canada claimed to have found "new evidence" that 44 "invalid" ballots were, in fact, cast by valid voters, even though their registration certificates could not be found.
The justices did not indicate whether it would even consider this new evidence — and Wrzesnewskyj's lawyers urged them not to. However, Wrzesnewskyj says his side didn't have time to fully examine Elections Canada's submission and to discover some revealing details. |
The CPC has pulled some sleazey tactics in the past;
I think its all part and parcel of politics, but Wrzesnewskyj's lawyer arguing that the Supreme Court should not consider the new evidence,
Especially when the new evidence appears to lend a fair bit of legitimacy to the fact that these votes were in fact cast legally is utter sleaze.
Once again,
As I have argued from the start, to imply that people committed fraud on election day should require fraud charges to not only be placed but for those individuals to be found guilty.
The fact that voters appeared on voter lists for two ridings is moot;
When I was in University I appeared on the list back home as well as in the riding my school was in.
As long as you only vote once, there is nothing wrong with being on two lists.
The Wrzesnewskyj camps argument is now very simple;
If one person voted in two ridings there should be evidence of that, of you can find it to the tune of 25+ votes then you are in good shape and those people should be charged immediately, but if you cant then you have an issue.
To toss out a vote because a crime "could" have been committed is not good enough. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 29, 2012 8:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
How about that;
The Supreme Court of Canada upheld existing laws rather then creating new ones?
| Quote: | The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Conservative MP Ted Opitz will not lose his seat, overturning a lower court ruling that had thrown out the 2011 federal election result in Etobicoke Centre.
An Ontario judge had ruled in May that there were sufficient irregularities around missing paperwork and improperly registered voters at polling stations in the Toronto riding to discard 79 ballots, negating Opitz's 26-vote margin over Liberal Borys Wrzewsnewskyj. |
| Quote: | | The majority decision argued the entitlement to vote cannot be annulled due to procedural errors and that there was a lack of evidence that most of the discarded ballots came from voters who were not qualified to vote. |
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politic.....ction.html |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 29, 2012 8:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
No evidence of election fraud, hence not a single charge being laid.
No evidence of wrongdoing on behalf of any party.
No evidence that the votes being asked to be removed were cast illegally, rather then in a procedurally poor fashion.
I am shocked the decision was so close; however the correct decision was made. |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Page 2 of 2
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
former liberal mp challenges Etobicoke Centre result incourt |
|
phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB |
|
