Insider Fraud In Kentucky

We have blogged  in the past about the fuzzy line between retail and wholesale vote fraud.  A story from Kentucky describes alleged, long-standing, fraud by officials.  In this case the fraud may have been limited in scope, but so were the elections which might well have been decided by skulduggery.  <read>

Wanda White testified that Clerk Freddy Thompson — the county’s chief election officer — helped show her how to manipulate voting machines along with Charles Wayne Jones, the Democratic election commissioner.

The scheme involved duping people to walk away from the voting computer before they had finished their elections, then changing their choices, said White, the Democratic judge in a precinct in Manchester.

White said she stole more than 100 votes that election.

“It was easy done,” she said.

White said she also went into the booth with people who had sold their vote to make sure they cast ballots for the candidates who had paid.

White testified Friday in the continuing trial of eight Clay County residents who allegedly took part in a scheme to rig elections over several years…

The machines had a “Vote” button that people could push to review their choices, then a second button they had to push to record the choices and finish voting.

At Maricle’s direction, she went to Stivers, who taught her about distracting voters so they would leave the machine after pushing the review button, but before they’d recorded their choices, White said.

Thompson and Jones used a voting machine to show her and Charles “Dobber” Weaver how to change votes, White said.

White said they did that at the clerk’s office after legitimate training for all election workers. She and Weaver stayed late to learn how to manipulate the machines, White said.

Weaver, then the Manchester fire chief, was the Republican judge in the precinct where White was the Democratic judge in May 2006.

Let us point out that it is questionable to call this electronic voting fraud.  It is two schemes, one made possible by confusing touch screen machines.  That scheme would work even if the touch screen had a “voter verified” paper record.  However, the other scheme, watching people vote to verify they did what they were paid to do, would work just as well with voter verified paper ballots, no matter how they are counted.


Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.