One important development may have just come from legal arguments by Coleman lawyer James Langdon: He has definitively stated that the Coleman camp does not want to include fraudulent ballots, despite some past arguments that have gone on.
Langdon did say that the burden of proof for fraud, which would lead to ballot rejection, has to be very high. After all, a voter is signing both an application and a ballot envelope, which certify that they are legal voters under penalty of a felony charge.
“We will not play loosey-goosey here,” said Langdon. “We will not countenance anything that constitutes fraud or the possibility of fraud. But we will believe that Minnesota’s voters say what they believe and believe what they say, like Horton the Elephant.”
As an example of a specific case where evidence of improper behavior exists, he mentioned Douglas Thompson, the friendly Coleman witness who testified in court that his girlfriend forged his signature on the absentee-ballot application, and who said his ballot should be counted because he signed the actual ballot envelope.
That’s a huge reversal from Coleman lawyer Joe Friedberg, who said he didn’t care about the procedures in Thompson’s case, or Friedberg’s other attempt to admit that one person had illegally signed and cast two ballots, but one of them should be counted.
Langdon also argued that absentee voters must not be held to a standard of total compliance, if it can be shown that they had genuine reason to believe they were doing it right. The best example of this would be if the voter traveled to the county office to cast the absentee vote in person, just to be sure they were doing it properly, and the clerk at the desk accepted the ballot without noticing that they weren’t getting it right.
A part of this discussion about flawed or missing absentee ballot applications led to this awkward exchange with Judge Denise Reilly:
Langdon: “And I see that you are not buying this, Judge Reilly.”
(Laughter)
Reilly: I thought I had a poker face.
(Laughter)
Langdon: Nope, I don’t think so.
….
Reilly: My concern is that the legislature passed a statute, and I took an oath to uphold the law.
Langdon: Well, how are you not upholding the law?
Reilly: You know, typically judges ask questions.
(More laughter)
