New: Fulgham v Ware County GA Board of Elections was heard in court today in regards to more double scanned 2020 ballots, and evidence was presented which shows the Ware Supervisor of Elections admitted to a journalist that ballots were double scanned. More evidence and the settlement verdict explained below. First of all I consider the case a win for Election Integrity and transparency. I appreciate Judge Kight not throwing out the case before the evidence could be presented as Ware officials had requested. And I appreciate Judge Muldrew for allowing me to make a full presentation of the evidence which will be public record. This was a civil lawsuit for information, similar to an open records requests, but more aggressively requesting an explanation of the double scanned ballots identified by analyst Phillip Davis, who successfully identified over 3,000 double scanned ballots in Fulton County as determined by SEB case 2023-025, and over 8,000 statewide from less than half the counties because records were prematurely destroyed. Davis identified around 150 double scanned ballots (1% of Ware's total) added to the first machine count cast vote record. I presented large billboard images showing the same hand marked ballots, but with different batch and ballot numbers. I showed the machine timestamp which indicates the second scan occurred 8 days after the first. The news article above claims it was a jam and rescan issue, but the scan time evidence does not support that claim. The news article also claims these double scanned ballots were resolved, but I explained to the court that the machine recount cast vote record is suspiciously missing. After I made a full presentation of the evidence the Ware attorney was given the opportunity by Judge Muldrew to ask me questions or call his witnesses. He did not do either. They never questioned my findings and they never presented any evidence or records which could contradict my evidence. They had the opportunity to do so before the lawsuit as well, but Ware election officials were never transparent. The verdict: The question was whether or not I could force them to legally respond. Judge Muldrew explained that he was bound by law and could not legally force them to answer questions in this format. But he offered an informal settlement option, which was to strongly recommend to Ware Election officials to meet with me in a boardroom following the case and to answer my questions. We entered a private room and I asked several questions for around 10 minutes. I was 100% NOT satisfied with the answers I received from Danny Bartlett (Chairman of the BOE) and Carlos Nelson (Election supervisor). In conclusion I do not believe they personally are guilty of fraud, but I do not believe they know what occurred. It appears to me they were coached by either Dominion Voting techs and or individuals from @GaSecofState office. In summary we did all we could in this particular case to expose the evidence. I have limited resources and no criminal investigation authority. Recall that Fulgham v Ware was filed because the GASOS/SEB refused in writing to investigate my initial complaint. Fulton county is still under investigation and I believe that our evidence is relevant because this election system is uniform across the state and there is a clear pattern of evidence in multiple counties. Always vote. Always defend the integrity of our elections. 🇺🇸