_fw.png)
The case of Barnes v. Town of Hampton involves a dispute over the handling and transparency of ballot boxes following an election. The plaintiff, Barnes, alleged that the town failed to follow proper chain-of-custody procedures for the ballot boxes, thereby compromising the integrity of the election process.
There was no chain-of-custody.
June 11, 2024, court transcript here:
Plaintiff’s Testimony and Evidence:
Barnes discussed evidence, including photographs, these photographs showed that seven out of 37 ballot boxes were either not properly signed off or missing documentation.
Barnes highlighted discrepancies found during a post-recount audit, where out of 47 boxes, only 16 were opened and examined, leaving 31 unopened and unexamined.
Barnes argued for a physical review of all 47 boxes, which was denied by the town clerk citing New Hampshire statute 659:95.
Chain of Custody Concerns:
The plaintiff emphasized the importance of the chain of custody for ballot boxes, referencing New Hampshire's right-to-know law (Chapter 91-A) that guarantees public access to government records, which includes chain-of-custody labels.
Barnes made several requests, both verbal and written, to review the complete chain of custody for all ballot boxes but was denied.
Town’s Defense:
The Town’s attorney, Mr. Sullivan, restated the testimony of the town clerk, Ms. Shirley Doheny, who asserted that all legal procedures were followed during the election.
The town acknowledged the receipt of the 91-A request but claimed that under statute 659, the request was exempt, although they did provide photographs of the boxes.
The town clerk explained that 28 ballot boxes were initially reviewed, with 10 replaced due to errors, totaling 37 boxes used in the election.
Witness Testimony:
Linda Brown, a witness for the plaintiff, testified about her past experiences with ballot box audits and recounts in New Hampshire, supporting the claim that chain-of-custody labels have been treated as public records in the past.
Brown cited a 2018 recount involving Bill Gardner and a 2022 state senate race as instances where she was allowed to inspect and photograph ballot boxes, thus establishing a precedent for public access.
Legal References:
The plaintiff referenced specific sections of New Hampshire Chapter 91-A, emphasizing the public's right to inspect government records, the lack of any exemptions for chain-of-custody labels, and the legal remedies available for violations.
Outcome: The court heard arguments from both sides and testimony from the witness. The judge adjourned the hearing, stating that the matter would be taken under advisement. No final decision was made during the hearing.
This case underscores the importance of transparency and adherence to legal procedures in election processes, highlighting the ongoing debate over public access to election-related documents and the integrity of the chain of custody for ballot boxes. #nhmuckraker #bigbrother #election #fraud #2024 #Trump #saveNH
June 11, 2024 Chau Kelly reporting:
June 16, 2024 Granite Grok article:
June 18, 2024 Truth Bomb Tuesday:
June 18, 2024 Justice 4 All with Jocelyn
Comments