To: Road Walker who wrote (118535 ) 11/20/2000 8:22:42 AM From: Amy J Read Replies (1) | Respond to Hi John, as I understand it, if the Judges rule in favor of Bush's (b), then this means, there would need to be a new filing or appeal (not sure of the legal term) by Gore to either a FL court or a fed court (not sure which, whichever one deals with EC and post-certified election disputes), and until such a filing is made and accepted, it appears there would be no legal ground for a manual recount (until it is filed and accepted) if Judge's ruled for (b) AND if the Judge's decided to ignore FL Statute 102.661 5(C) which is (a) in my post. I'm getting the feeling Bush's filing is weak. Harris' filing is the worst - one of her opinions (and action) was not backed up by any existing legal case, and in fact, her opinion appears to be contradicted by several prior legal cases with prior SOS's. She may be in trouble. Common sense tells me she is, for creating delay tactics & inflicting the consequences of these delay tactics onto the canvassing boards, especially since her tactic appeared to be contrary to a statute. Her legal team may not have given her good advice. Gore's briefing has one error: it should have requested for a manual recount in the entire state of Florida, but other than that and assuming that gets fixed, it was IMHO the best and really made clear his point about the will of the people. Btw, they listed a lot of legal cases that stated manual counting is the prefered method over machine count for reliability. This appears to be a standard belief across the USA and they sited cases in Mass, Texas, etc., so I doubt Bush's point on this will hold, unless they prove the manual recounts were done incorrectly so. One really interesting thing to note is: Texas statute (Bush's State) states that an indention should be counted because it was the will of the voter. If FL concurs with Texas Statute on this point, then Gore wins. Regards, Amy J
