Sheridan Consulted Over Challenge To Ballot Fiasco (from The Herald Election Site)

Tommy Sheridan and Allan Wilson have held talks in the wake of the election fiasco which saw both of them lose their seats at Holyrood.

The Herald has learned that Mr Wilson, the Labour candidate who was defeated by just 48 votes in Cunninghame North, e-mailed the Solidarity leader on Friday suggesting they should discuss what happened at their respective counts. Mr Sheridan failed to secure a seat on the Glasgow regional list.

Legal challenges are being considered over the two counts and yesterday Mr Wilson said he had contacted Mr Sheridan because of the apparent similarities between the cases.

He said: "Somebody told me he was considering mounting a legal case and I asked him to give me a phone.

"I wanted to ask him a couple of questions about what the pattern of voting had been on the list and whether it equated with what happened in Cunninghame North."

Labour Party lawyers are seeking a manual recount of all the votes cast in Cunninghame North, something they claim was denied them by the returning officer.

Although Mr Sheridan is not mounting a legal challenge to the Glasgow result himself, he is supporting a case which is being brought by Mike Dailly, a solicitor at the Govan Law Centre.

Mr Dailly says the parliamentary ballot paper was so complicated that thousands of voters made the mistake of putting two crosses on the regional section and none on the constituency part.

Around 9000 votes were discarded and Mr Dailly believes either Mr Sheridan or another Green could have been elected if they had stood. That could also have deprived the SNP of a list seat and changed the national result.

Yesterday, Mr Dailly said he may apply to the sheriff court seeking an order for the release of all the discarded ballot papers to assess whether they would have made a difference to the final outcome. "If we can establish the ballots would have made a difference then the case has got more merit," he said.

IN The Herald's Election 2007 supplement on Saturday, we gave the wrong parties for three councillors.

Douglas McAllister, who will represent the Kilpatrick ward on West Dunbartonshire council, stood for Labour; Caroline Shiers stood for the Conservative Party in Blairgowrie and the Glens Ward on Perth and Kinross Council; and Alex Allison represented the Tories in the Clydesdale West ward on South Lanarkshire Council.

We also omitted to publish a photograph of Stewart Maxwell, who was elected MSP for the SNP from the West of Scotland list. In addition, we wrongly stated that Iain White, the SNP candidate in Ayr constituency, polled 873 votes. It was, in fact, 7952 votes.

Oh come off it! "Considering legal actions" "discuss what had happened"

Herald, do us long suffering voters a favour and investigate what's going in the background here. It's clear as Highland Spring what is going on. Skullduggery of the worst fashion.

Do we not deserve better than this? Whilst all this inaction and lack of grace is going on, coupled with the Lib-Dems frankly infuriating and (dare I say suspicious?) lack of compromise, we are left with a period of instability and stasis. What good is that to us? The poor whelps who actually work to keep these b*ggers in power?

Pull the blasted finger out the lot of you. We will not forget this.

ummm

one is six of ALL constituencies had spoiled ballots that were greater than their winning candidates votes.

If either of these two challenges are upheld then all the others will have to be challenged as well... labour cannot just challenge 2 of them.. what about the other 100,000 votes??

This would result in us having to re-run the entire holyrood election again... er no thanks.. we have had enough and the election process has already moved on...... accept it!

The three stooges ... if you include their lawyer friend ...

Nothing like a wee bit of collaboration with the former enemy to bring out the best in folk, is there !

Don't leave it to these two chancers with a vested interest and lawyers in search of a fat fee to cherry pick and lead for the rest of us , Please instead sign and then help newtork this e-petition on the Scottish Vote Scandal

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/ScottishVoteScandal2007/

Please sign this e-petition on the Scottish Vote Scandal , and help network it to others. Coalition talks are important,. but the right to vote fundamental

Ballot paper "so complicated"?
Come off it! I don't mean to be cruel, but If you're unable to master the manifold complexities of the SP ballot paper, then maybe you shouldn't be voting. Or indeed using scissors or other sharp implements.

It's no coincidence perhaps that the hugest piles of spoilt ballots were located in the fortresses of Labour dominance... nah, that really is cruel.

Re the spoilt papers and the request for them to be scrutinised/examined. Would this not be an invasion of an individuals right to vote as they see fit, whether they spoil the ballot paper or not?. What does the Data Protection Act have to say on this matter when it appears all and sundry are able to scrutinise how a person voted. If a person is contacted by this lawyer, or his representative, can they claim harassment in that they may not wish to pursue the matter, accepting the fact it was their own fault. If, as alleged, there was similar fiasco in the London Lord Mayor ballot, I was not aware of any re-run. If that is the case, why all the fuss now. Finally, I suspect the Lib Dem wimps are not forming a coalition with the SNP in case Labour do manage to turn the vote around (and pigs will fly) and don't want to appear as though they have switched their loyalties. Once all the furore has died down, then you will see them jump ship.

Re the spoilt papers and the request for them to be scrutinised/examined.

Would this not be an invasion of an individuals right to vote as they see fit, whether they spoil the ballot paper or not?. What does the Data Protection Act have to say on this matter when it appears all and sundry are able to scrutinise how a person voted.

If a person is contacted by this lawyer, or his representative, can they claim harassment in that they may not wish to pursue the matter, accepting the fact it was their own fault.

If, as alleged, there was similar fiasco in the London Lord Mayor ballot, I was not aware of any re-run. If that is the case, why all the fuss now.

Finally, I suspect the Lib Dem wimps are not forming a coalition with the SNP in case Labour do manage to turn the vote around (and pigs will fly) and don't want to appear as though they have switched their loyalties. Once all the furore has died down, then you will see them jump ship.

If labour allow this to go ahead not only have they lost the right to govern they have lost any moral worth.
This is a shameful act in Scottish politics.

Dear Editor So barely is the ink dry so to speak that New Labour seeks to �steal� the election from the SNP elect government. As I understand it, New Labour is seeking to launch two challenges, one by a New Labour former MSP loser and the other by a lawyer, Mike Dailly who is allegedly acting for the people of Glasgow whose ballot papers were rejected. [bold]For those interested, a New Labour politican sits on the Board of Trustees of the Govan Law Centre. Baillie John Flanagan (Govan Local Elected Member for Glasgow City Council), he is the Secretary.[/bold] It is not surprising that New Labour should attempt to �steal� the seat from the duly elected SNP candidate, when Allan Wilson has no case. Hopefully any judge will throw this nonsense out on the basis; 1/ All candidates fought the seat under the same conditions. 2/ There was no electoral fraud by the SNP winner. 3/ There was no electoral fraud by those administrating at the polling station. 4/ There was no electoral fraud by those involved in the transportation of the ballot boxes. 5/ New Labour ran the election. 6/ That New Labour were warned in advance that there could be problems holding the Parliament and Council elections on the same day. 7/ That No New Labour MP, either Alexander or Cairns have admitted any liability at the Scottish Office for wrong doing in any shape or form. Therefore given these circumstances and the fact that a similar pattern was repeated across Scotland there is no case for re-run the Cunningham North seat. As to the challenge to the Glasgow Regional list by a lawyer on behalf of those who had their ballots rejected, this should also be rejected. Here are some interesting questions which should be posed to that lawyer. 1/ Given that in order to get representation from a lawyer in a civil case you would need to make an appointment because of caseloads, exactly how did anyone manage to get hold of a lawyer so soon? [bold]I approached the Govan Law Centre with my case and was told I could not get an appointment for three months. These "clients" get an appointment within a day, at the weekend, when the Govan Law Centre is closed[/bold]. 2/ The people who are his alleged �clients� can they prove their ballots were rejected? 3/ If they can prove and know that their ballots were rejected, why did they not fill them in correctly when they had the opportunity since they appear to have knowledge of the system? 4/ Given the above does this lawyer have clients? 5/ Given that to prove loss in this case you would have to show something in the way of evidence, what evidence do these alleged �clients� have? They have no evidence that the actions of those elected by regional ballot caused them loss. 6/ Given that any alleged �client� in this case had only one vote, exactly how many people is the lawyer representing? 7/ For those who wish to play Sherlock Holmes out there, this might be worthwhile passing on to the SNP, when these alleged �clients cast their vote, they might have left their finger prints on it. In the interests of justice perhaps every �client� should be finger printed. If their ballot turns up and it is not a rejected paper then a charge of election fraud can be made against them. 8/ In any subsequent interview, the Police can investigate who if anyone put these people up to it. They can also be charged for conspiracy to de-fraud and anything else that goes with it if it turns out anyone from a political party was involved. Finally I find it laughable that New Labour�s Margaret Curran and Whitton ranted so much at the microphone on polling night because of a bit of heckling and booing. They called that intimidation, what do they call New Labour�s attempt to �steal� the election by using the process of a court when they have no case? Yours sincerely George Laird The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University 2/1 12 Salen Street Craigton Glasgow G52 1EB

Dear Editor

So barely is the ink dry so to speak that New Labour seeks to �steal� the election from the SNP elect government.

As I understand it, New Labour is seeking to launch two challenges, one by a New Labour former MSP loser and the other by a lawyer, Mike Dailly who is allegedly acting for the people of Glasgow whose ballot papers were rejected.

For those interested, a New Labour politican sits on the Board of Trustees of the Govan Law Centre. Baillie John Flanagan (Govan Local Elected Member for Glasgow City Council), he is the Secretary.

It is not surprising that New Labour should attempt to �steal� the seat from the duly elected SNP candidate, when Allan Wilson has no case. Hopefully any judge will throw this nonsense out on the basis;

1/ All candidates fought the seat under the same conditions.

2/ There was no electoral fraud by the SNP winner.

3/ There was no electoral fraud by those administrating at the polling station.

4/ There was no electoral fraud by those involved in the transportation of the ballot boxes.

5/ New Labour ran the election.

6/ That New Labour were warned in advance that there could be problems holding the Parliament and Council elections on the same day.

7/ That No New Labour MP, either Alexander or Cairns have admitted any liability at the Scottish Office for wrong doing in any shape or form.

Therefore given these circumstances and the fact that a similar pattern was repeated across Scotland there is no case for re-run the Cunningham North seat.

As to the challenge to the Glasgow Regional list by a lawyer on behalf of those who had their ballots rejected, this should also be rejected.

Here are some interesting questions which should be posed to that lawyer.

1/ Given that in order to get representation from a lawyer in a civil case you would need to make an appointment because of caseloads, exactly how did anyone manage to get hold of a lawyer so soon?

I approached the Govan Law Centre with my case and was told I could not get an appointment for three months. These "clients" get an appointment within a day, at the weekend, when the Govan Law Centre is closed.

2/ The people who are his alleged �clients� can they prove their ballots were rejected?

3/ If they can prove and know that their ballots were rejected, why did they not fill them in correctly when they had the opportunity since they appear to have knowledge of the system?

4/ Given the above does this lawyer have clients?

5/ Given that to prove loss in this case you would have to show something in the way of evidence, what evidence do these alleged �clients� have? They have no evidence that the actions of those elected by regional ballot caused them loss.

6/ Given that any alleged �client� in this case had only one vote, exactly how many people is the lawyer representing?

7/ For those who wish to play Sherlock Holmes out there, this might be worthwhile passing on to the SNP, when these alleged �clients cast their vote, they might have left their finger prints on it. In the interests of justice perhaps every �client� should be finger printed. If their ballot turns up and it is not a rejected paper then a charge of election fraud can be made against them.

8/ In any subsequent interview, the Police can investigate who if anyone put these people up to it. They can also be charged for conspiracy to de-fraud and anything else that goes with it if it turns out anyone from a political party was involved.

Finally I find it laughable that New Labour�s Margaret Curran and Whitton ranted so much at the microphone on polling night because of a bit of heckling and booing. They called that intimidation, what do they call New Labour�s attempt to �steal� the election by using the process of a court when they have no case?

Yours sincerely

George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University
2/1 12 Salen Street
Craigton
Glasgow
G52 1EB

To Alan Smart: I have already signed the petition you mention in every post you make on this forum. However, after your remarks above I am seriously considering removing my name from it. If the elections are perceived as unfair then they are unfair to everyone. If Allan Wilson and Tommy Sheridan feel the elections were unfair and that they were personally disadvantaged surely they have the right to challenge this! If the elections were unfair they should be rerun! How does that make anyone who says they were unfair 'chancers' - or is that because they are not SNP candidates?

Dear Norma

"If Allan Wilson and Tommy Sheridan feel the elections were unfair and that they were personally disadvantaged surely they have the right to challenge this!"

The right to challange is not in dispute, but rather do they have a case in law. This in my opinion is the key question which I believe they have not.

Everyone was disadvantaged to the same degree and there was no fraud or actions by the winners to cause them loss.

Therefore they do not have a case.

Yours sincerely

George Laird

In my opinion every canditate has the right to a re count as the wrong results were given and winning majorities are incorrect. A lot of people voting for their MSP only filled in the left hand side of the paper marking numbers not just one cross as required and never filled in the right hand side of the paper which remained blank in many ballot papers. ]The people of Scotland are entitled to know the true result of this election.

[quote][bold]John[/bold] wrote: In my opinion every canditate has the right to a re count as the wrong results were given and winning majorities are incorrect. A lot of people voting for their MSP only filled in the left hand side of the paper marking numbers not just one cross as required and never filled in the right hand side of the paper which remained blank in many ballot papers. ]The people of Scotland are entitled to know the true result of this election.[/quote] Dear John If the right side of the ballot paper was not filled in then that is not enough to mount a basis of a legal case. The instructions were clear on the form, the fact people did not take time to read or just spolit their papers is not enough. Yours sincerely George Laird The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

John wrote:
In my opinion every canditate has the right to a re count as the wrong results were given and winning majorities are incorrect. A lot of people voting for their MSP only filled in the left hand side of the paper marking numbers not just one cross as required and never filled in the right hand side of the paper which remained blank in many ballot papers. ]The people of Scotland are entitled to know the true result of this election.

Dear John

If the right side of the ballot paper was not filled in then that is not enough to mount a basis of a legal case.

The instructions were clear on the form, the fact people did not take time to read or just spolit their papers is not enough.

Yours sincerely

George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

I notice from the "Defend Tommy Sheridan" website that those supporting him have approached the Guildford 4 for support. I think those people who have dragged the Guildford 4 into this should be ashamed of themselves. The fact they have lied to these people, who were real victims of the British State, makes me hope that justice IS done and Tommy Sheridan is shown as the charlaton he is. Not only is he not content in trying to ruin the reputations of socialists who were once SSP comrades in order to bolster his ego and career, he doesn't care about dragging in men who were truly attacked by the British State - Tommy Sheridan took on the British State and Murdoch to prove a lie was truth. These men were indiscrimminately plucked from their homes and incarcerated for something they did not do. Shame on Tommy Sheridan, and shame on those who are bringing his lies and deceet to a whole new level.

I notice from the "Defend Tommy Sheridan" website that those supporting him have approached the Guildford 4 for support. I think those people who have dragged the Guildford 4 into this should be ashamed of themselves. The fact they have lied to these people, who were real victims of the British State, makes me hope that justice IS done and Tommy Sheridan is shown as the charlaton he is. Not only is he not content in trying to ruin the reputations of socialists who were once SSP comrades in order to bolster his ego and career, he doesn't care about dragging in men who were truly attacked by the British State - Tommy Sheridan took on the British State and Murdoch to prove a lie was truth. These men were indiscrimminately plucked from their homes and incarcerated for something they did not do.

Shame on Tommy Sheridan, and shame on those who are bringing his lies and deceet to a whole new level.

Herald & Times Group
Terms & Conditions Privacy Policy © Copyright 2001-2008 A Gannett Company