Jiokejohn:

What is the meaning of CTC? And what does it implies?

INEC certified the blurred copies that it was printed from the IREV. But is the IREV the basis for declaring results? There are original copies and there are agent copies. INEC tabulate their results from the hard copies.

Spirit04:


so inec should bring 18000 results to court for the judges to sort?

It is not the duty of the Judges to sort..
It is the duty of the LP Counsel..

Did LP demand that INEC produce those results?

YESS..
LP demanded for such..

BUT THE INEC DIDN'T BRING “ALL” THE DEMANDED DOCUMENTS TO THE COURT..

AND OUT OF THE ONES THEY BROUGHT,, THOUSANDS WERE BLURRED.

If they brought it,, the LP Counsel would have sorted them and analyze them as quickly as possible, and bring out more facts from them.

tinsel:

INEC certified the blurred copies that it was printed from the IREV. But is the IREV the basis for declaring results? There are original copies and there are agent copies. INEC tabulate their results from the hard copies.

Check the list of evidence/exhibit abbegg..

Stop being ignorant here abbegg..

It's not only the IREV-Printed CTC results that the INEC produced.

BluntCrazeMan:
Check the list of evidence/exhibit abbegg..

Stop being ignorant here abbegg..

It's not only the IREV-Printed CTC results that the INEC produced.

You are still not answering my question. Which one of those documents are blurred? Forms EC8 from IREV or all every order documents INEC certified?

tinsel:

You are still not answering my question. Which one of those documents are blurred? Forms EC8 from IREV or all every order documents INEC certified?

I will still tell you for the thousandth time...

The CTCs of the so-called original top-copies of the EC8As were blurred.

So, how come?
(INEC Counsel blamed the toner in the photocopying-machine)

BluntCrazeMan:
LP claimed that they don't have all the polling unit results in all the polling units..
INEC helped them establish the fact by saying that there are 176,000+plus polling units, but LP provided only about 130,000 polling agents.

So,, LP demanded that the INEC provide the EC8A-Results..
INEC provided them.
But amongst the results,, there are 18,088 blurred results which the INEC brought to the court and claimed they were the results in their custody..

If LP showed that 18,088 polling unit results were blurred; and then, INEC claimed that there are supposed to be “Originals” to those blurred results,,...
So then, who is by Law supposed to provide the “Originals”??


(He who asserts must prove his assertion)


INEC were the ones who said that the LP doesn't have the copies of the results, because they don't have enough party agents deployed in the election..
They provided blurred results,, and still went ahead to say that there should be “Originals”.


The blurred 18,088 had already been established in court..
What is not established yet is that INEC claimed that they still have the “Original” versions of all those blurred copies, and that they don't want to bring it.

THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS NOW ON THE INEC TO PROVIDE THOSE ACCLAIMED “ORIGINALS”, AND USE THEM TO COUNTER THE ALREADY ESTABLISHED 18,088 BLURRED COPIES..

If LP didn't have clear copies of the result from a whopping 18,088 polling units how then did they come about their claim that they won the election? That means they have zero presence in 18,000 units of the federation.


They truly deseved those heavy fines imposed on them

justified007:




If LP didn't have clear copies of the result from a whopping 18,088 polling units how then did they come about their claim that they won the election? That means they have zero presence in 18,000 units of the federation.


They truly deseved those heavy fines imposed on them

It means that NO SINGLE PARTY recorded any presence in whooping 18,000 polling units.
(Not only LP).

The total number of affected registered voters in these 18k+ polling units are bigger than the margin of lead.

Meanwhile,, there were no imposed fines on the parties.

BluntCrazeMan:
It means that NO SINGLE PARTY recorded any presence in whooping 18,000 polling units.
(Not only LP).

The total number of affected registered voters in these 18k+ polling units are bigger than the margin of lead.

Meanwhile,, there were no imposed fines on the parties.

Did the other parties tells you they didn't have results in those units ? Only LP has such a challenge and they're so arrogant they can't liase with other parties especially PDP that happened to be their parent political party for assistance on the results from those units since they have the same common goal.

BluntCrazeMan:
It is not the duty of the Judges to sort..
It is the duty of the LP Counsel..

YESS..
LP demanded for such..

BUT THE INEC DIDN'T BRING “ALL” THE DEMANDED DOCUMENTS TO THE COURT..

AND OUT OF THE ONES THEY BROUGHT,, THOUSANDS WERE BLURRED.

If they brought it,, the LP Counsel would have sorted them and analyze them as quickly as possible, and bring out more facts from them.

keep deceiving yourself. LP were merely interested in theatrics and entertainment of their online brainless hordes. They went to the internet and downloaded the results that were blurred and started asking moronic questions like "where did INEC get the results they announced when 18k polling units had blurred results?" As if physical copies didn't exist. I even had this argument before the election

justified007:

They're so arrogant they can't liaise with other parties especially PDP

Hmmm..
You expect LP to go and get evidence from another party??

It's better for LP to get evidence from INEC,, than for them to get it from another party.

PDP that happened to be their parent political party...

This is a very ignorant stance..

LP started long before the birth of PDP sef.
PDP is actually a parent party to APC..
And not to LP.

BluntCrazeMan:
LP claimed that they don't have all the polling unit results in all the polling units..
INEC helped them establish the fact by saying that there are 176,000+plus polling units, but LP provided only about 130,000 polling agents.

So,, LP demanded that the INEC provide the EC8A-Results..
INEC provided them.
But amongst the results,, there are 18,088 blurred results which the INEC brought to the court and claimed they were the results in their custody..

If LP showed that 18,088 polling unit results were blurred; and then, INEC claimed that there are supposed to be “Originals” to those blurred results,,...
So then, who is by Law supposed to provide the “Originals”??


(He who asserts must prove his assertion)


INEC were the ones who said that the LP doesn't have the copies of the results, because they don't have enough party agents deployed in the election..
They provided blurred results,, and still went ahead to say that there should be “Originals”.


The blurred 18,088 had already been established in court..
What is not established yet is that INEC claimed that they still have the “Original” versions of all those blurred copies, and that they don't want to bring it.

THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS NOW ON THE INEC TO PROVIDE THOSE ACCLAIMED “ORIGINALS”, AND USE THEM TO COUNTER THE ALREADY ESTABLISHED 18,088 BLURRED COPIES..

NOT IN A CASH AND CARRY JUDICIARY.