Thursday, October 25, 2012

Liberals Lose Again

...Ha. Ha. Ha.

Opitz remains MP in hotly contested Ontario riding following SCC ruling
"Conservative MP Ted Opitz will keep his seat in a contested Toronto riding after the Supreme Court of Canada narrowly ruled in his favour in a case linked to voting irregularities in the last federal election. In a split 4-3 decision, Canada’s top court upheld the MP’s appeal of an earlier Ontario court ruling that found the results of the May 2011 election in Etobicoke Centre should be overturned, and a byelection held. At the centre of the issue was a number of procedural irregularities found following the May 2011 election, when Opitz ousted Liberal incumbent Boris Wrzesnewskyj by a margin of just 26 votes.

In a split 4-3 decision, Canada’s top court upheld the MP’s appeal of an earlier Ontario court ruling that found the results of the May 2011 election in Etobicoke Centre should be overturned, and a byelection held.

At the centre of the issue was a number of procedural irregularities found following the May 2011 election, when Opitz ousted Liberal incumbent Boris Wrzesnewskyj by a margin of just 26 votes."
[---]
"In their ruling, the seven Supreme Court justices found 59 of the rejected votes should have been allowed to stand."
My question is, which candidate(s) were the 59 "rejected votes" for? And why were they rejected in the first place?

Labels: , , ,

3 Comments:

Blogger robins111 said...

You really want a giggle, go over to the CBC site and read the comments. They are taking this hard.... lol

October 25, 2012 11:35 am  
Blogger Louise said...

I can well imagine, but I just ate, so I think I'll stay away from there for a while.

October 25, 2012 1:28 pm  
Blogger Dave in Pa. said...

I just read the CBC article. It states that 79 votes were initially discarded by the lower court judge. "An Ontario judge had ruled in May that there were sufficient irregularities around missing paperwork and improperly registered voters at polling stations in the Toronto riding to discard 79 ballots".

In a split decision, the Supreme Court reinstated 59 of the 79 votes, stating "The majority decision argued the entitlement to vote cannot be annulled due to procedural errors and that there was a lack of evidence that most of the discarded ballots came from voters who were not qualified to vote."

As far as the comments, they were from both candidates, PM Harper, various and sundry lawyers and law professors. They all struck me as reasoned and reasonable, not the usual heated drivel one sees at CBC and other leftard MSM sites, on both sides of the Can/US border. Maybe robins 111 is referring to another page of comments but the one at my hyperlink above is the only one I could find.

October 25, 2012 9:37 pm  

Post a Comment

<< Home