b.

In the course of our investigation we learned:

·

In Monroe County, the 3% hand-count failed to match the machine count

twice. Subsequent with on demo version matched neither each other nor the

hand count. The Monroe County Board of Elections summoned a

repairman from Triad to bring a new machine and the recount was

suspended and reconvened for the following day. On the following day, a

new machine was present at the Board of Elections office and the old

machine was gone. The Board conducted a test deck run followed by the

3% hand-counted ballots. The results matched this time and the Board

conducted the remainder of the recount by machine.

·

In Fairfield County, the hand recount of the 3% test sample did not match

the machine count, even after two attempts. The Board suspended the

recount and stated that Secretary Blackwell recommended that the recount

should begin again "from scratch." The Green recount observers were

then told that it was 4:00 PM, the building was closed, and all had to

leave. The Republican recount observers, however, were allowed to stay in

a conference room for an additional ten minutes or so for a private

discussion. When the Board reconvened a few days later, it announced

that it would be conducting a machine count of the county's votes. When

a Green Party observer objected, she was told by the Board that she was

not allowed to speak.

Irregularities in the Treatment of Ballots S Some Counties Marking Ballots

c.

In the course of our investigation we learned:

·

In Washington County, the Board of Elections had, in the first count,

excluded ballots which included no votes and overvotes. During the

recount, the Board altered many such ballots to make them work. An

observer protested this practice. An election official pulled a black marker

from his right pocket near the beginning of the recount and stated that he

was the mark-up man. He proceeded to do all of the marking of the

ballots. Another election official assisted with the "band-aids". The

observer noted that all the re-marking and band-aiding of ballots did

reflect the will of the voter, with one exception. In the precinct Belpre 4A,

a voter had both marked the oval and put an X through it for presidential

candidate Michael Peroutka and had marked the oval for Bush. The

election official put a band-aid over the Peroutka vote and put his own X

on the Bush vote. The observer objected that it should be counted as an

overvote. The Board ruled that the vote should count for Bush.

94