Moss v. Moyer: (Ohio Fraud Case) Ruleing - Show Proof of Fraud by 1/7/04 or its thrown out.

state.oh.us ^

[Next_Time_NJ]

2004-2106. Moss v. Moyer. On Petition to Contest Election. This cause originated in this court on the filing of a petition to contest an election under R.C. 3515.08 et seq. The court has previously acknowledged the applicability of a Civ.R. 12(B)(6) dismissal for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted in an election contest case. In re Election Contest of Democratic Primary Election Held May 4, 1999 for Nomination of Clerk, Youngstown Municipal Court (1999), 87 Ohio St.3d 118, 717 N.E.2d 701. Normally, minimal notice pleading is all that is required to withstand dismissal under Civ.R. 12(B)(6). Id. at 120, 717 N.E.2d 701. Here, however, the contestors' claims are based primarily on fraud and mistake. Therefore, the contestors must state the "circumstances constituting fraud or mistake * * * with particularity." Civ.R. 9(B). Accordingly, upon review of contestors' petition, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to my authority under R.C. 3515.11 to control and direct this election contest proceeding, that the contestors shall show cause by January 7, 2005 why their petition should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted because it does not allege the circumstances constituting fraud or mistake with particularity. Contestees may file a memorandum in response on or before January 14, 2005. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the filing of an answer by the contestees and any discovery, including depositions, subpoenas, and requests for production of documents, shall be, and hereby are, stayed pending resolution of this preliminary issue. O'Connor, J., in Chambers.

[Next_Time_NJ]

hehehe.. im all smiles ;) They will never be able to show proof, because there isnt any. Also, congress already meets... Just another win .. keep em comming!

[Next_Time_NJ]

Oh and to add... They cant get any depositions, subpoenas, and requests for production of documents..UNTIL they show proof of fraud.

[LauraleeBraswell]

The Dems are sore losers

[derheimwill]

Whew, I was worried there for a second!

[RtWngr]

Gotta love it when a federal judge takes the bull by the horns and issues an order telling the dems that they are on their last breath.

[REDWOOD99]

Finally,... A judge with brains! "Show me the fraud. Not just a suspicion- proof."

[26lemoncharlie]

The only FRAUD here are these Charges and Jessie Jackson!

You can lay odds the National Socialists are hard at work conjuring up EVIDENCE!!

[goldstategop]

Yep. The DU Dummies are caught between a legal rock and a legal hard place. So far they've done an impressive amount of whining but still have yet to show how and where the Ohio election got stolen.

[Petronski]

There's going to be some bleeding in DUmmyland tonight. LOL

[Ole Okie]

Thanks for posting this.

Over at DU, they have been touting a publication claiming George W Bush, Karl Rove, Dick Cheney and others have been subpoened for deposition on the Ohio "fraud" in the next couple of days.

Things have really been surreal over at the DUmmies place.

This ought to settle things down a little bit.

[goldstategop]

LOL! They can't even do that until they produce PROOF of fraud. Nice try in overturning the election in court but no cigars!

[TruthShallSetYouFree]

And let us not forget the million Black voters that were disenfranchised in 2000 (according to AlGore). They weren't able to produce credible evidence of even one person being disenfranchised, let alone a million. It's the old Rat mantra--the seriousness of the charges is much more important than the existence of evidence.

[goldstategop]

Yep. The courts run on evidence and our friends on the Left don't even have dubious junk science on their side - just a lot of hot air.

[SedVictaCatoni]

Just a couple comments to clarify all this:

(A) This case is pending before the Ohio Supreme Court, not a federal court.

(B) The Ohio Rules of Civil Procedure (the regulations governing how litigation works) require that if you're suing alleging fraud, you have to explain in your lawsuit exactly what fraud you think has occurred and why. As Justice O'Connor stated in this opinion, it isn't enough to say "we're sure there was fraud, and we'll find out exactly how during this case".

(B1) So the Ohio Supreme Court isn't requiring proof of fraud, exactly, it's requiring that by Jan. 7 they give some specific examples of what fraud is supposed to have occurred.

[Rudder]

There was fraud for sure in the Ohio election process.

The problem with exposing it lies in the fact the fraud was perpetrated by the dems. One of the examples was the use of voter "registers" who were hired (by the dems) and paid a fee for each registration submitted. Many of these (in Ohio and in Wash state) registered anything that moved and also they submitted many registrations with the same (bogus) address.

[goldstategop]

"Failure to state the grounds upon which relief can be granted." Looks like they'll have shut up about Bush for the next four years.

[Nick Danger]

The use of court filings as PR stunts is increasing. I wish that judges would get a lot tougher on the lawyers who file these things.

Whatever lawyer filed this on behalf of the Democrats knew damn well that no case could proceed on the basis of alleging "fraud in general." Such a thing can neither be proven nor disproved. It is therefore not adjudicable.

To have a trial, somebody has to say, "Person X did Y on or about date Z, and that act constituted election fraud." Whether or not that happened, and whether it was fraudulent if it did, are things that can be determined. But the Democrats alleged no such thing in their complaint.

It was all a PR stunt. They knew it was a PR stunt when they filed it.

So here's the judge throwing it out. But why not take the extra step and fine the lawyers who filed the damned thing? They've wasted taxpayer money and court time, purely to generate a headline.

[italianquaker]

good to see him back




1-20 the only numbers that count

[SedVictaCatoni]

Whatever lawyer filed this on behalf of the Democrats knew damn well that no case could proceed on the basis of alleging "fraud in general."

Believe it or not, I know one of them. He's not really the sharpest tool in the shed. :-)

[flashbunny]

This is great - we only have to keep them from uncovering the massive voter suppression and fraud we did in ohio until January 8th! We can do that easy...heck, we've done it for nearly two months already, we can do it for another week or so.

Then the fun part comes - showing the whole world how we committed fraud in ohio AND how we kept it hidden until just after the information could do us harm. Then we can all sit back and laugh at the hapless democrats. Oh what a time to be a memeber of the VWRC!!!!!

P.S. Everybody be sure to keep your secret fraud files safe until January 8th. We don't want to blow this now!