(Please rewrite for new tone: keyword- Supreme Court)
Atty. Glenn Chong’s questions the PET resolution, saying that the printed election returns will only be used in the initial cutting by ballot. There’s a big question at this point. The election returns or result of the election and the report or summary of the ballot and votes are both inspired by the single document only – the ballot images or image of the ballot that the machine took after entering the voter’s ballot in the VCM. Mr. Edmund Casino of the Computer Society of the Philippines expresses his disgust over the decrypted images that prove to be not the replica of the original ballots. This alone he said is a violation of the election law. The Supreme Court recently rules to use the election returns as the basis of the recount after setting aside the threshold dispute.
YouTube video by Innovation Philippines
[VIDEO]: Mr. Edmund Casino, an IT expert slams SMARTMATIC, calls it incompetent and unacceptable to the Filipino electorate.
In the image is a report from precinct 17040010 in Bombon, CAMARINES SUR. This report will be visible to the of sections of this report from the machine and the explanations in these data.
Lost Ballots in the Supreme Court Count
In the vice presidential contest, we can see all the votes read and counted by the machine (no one voted + so much voted + all votes obtained by all candidates) were 667 only. But according to the machine, there were 679 votes and 679 used ballots during the poll. Why 667 votes only were read by the machine? Where are the 12 votes that should be counted? The Supreme Court gag order is successful covering this up.
See the report where the 12 votes have been placed. If it’s abstentions, it means the voter has no vote. It should be in the under-votes because there is no vote. But why place in abstentions? It’s clear that there is an ambiguous character or an un-clear mark that the machine does not know. The 5 % to 20 % of markings in the oval space actually serve as ambiguous marks. This is why the Supreme Court must not adhere to the 25% plea of the presumptive VP, Leni Robredo.
The alien marking or a small dot (5 % to 20 % of the oval space) in the oval of the fraudulent candidate for the position to be deceived allows the machine to classify it as a vote for the cheater before it reaches the voter’s hand. When the voter voted any candidate in this position except the fraudulent candidate with a small dot (ambiguous mark) at the oval, the voter’s vote for the voted candidate is not counted even if the round-shaped shading area is marked. This is because there is an ambiguous mark in one of the candidates in such a position. It will go to the abstentions. The Supreme Court must scrutinize this.
But if the fraudulent candidate with a small dot is voted by the voter, of course, the mark will be made in the round-shaped shading area. It will be counted for the cheater because the ambiguous mark will be lost at the oval of this candidate. That’s just simple and logical for programmers. How many votes did get in this way? There were 92,509 ports that opened on the election day. Let’s say at least 12 each is in this nature and the average measure is 25 % (yes, that 25 %!), it will reach 370,036 votes per precinct. It can definitely win the VP post!