This issue is archived at http://www.risks.org as

http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/22.93.html

The current issue can be found at

http://www.csl.sri.com/users/risko/risks.txt

[....]

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 09:57:44 -0400

From: "Brent M.P. Beleskey" <voterscoalition@rogers.com>

Subject: Diebold voting machines in Volusia County FL

ELECTION THEFT 2000! A NEW BOMBSHELL!: A Diebold Voting Machines in

Volusia County, Florida, Tallied a Vote-Count of -16,022. That's

NEGATIVE 16,022:

When will this all-important story break out in the US mainstream press? When will the Democrats confront the issue? What is at stake here is the future of democracy.

Diebold Internal Support Memos

[The original article to which this post refers waso riginally published on 29 Nov 2000 in *USA Today* by Philip Meyer. When I did a search for the article on the www.usatoday.com website I came up with this page which clearly provides the details of the article and even offers a link to a free preview of the article. However, when you click on the link, it gives you a page void of the article. What happened to it? One can only speculate. Nevertheless, I have obtained the original article.

BMPB]

[Contact Brent Beleskey <voterscoalition@rogers.com> for the

article, PGN]

A remarkable exchange concerning Diebold's voting machines in Volusia County, Florida: On January 17, 2001, Lana Hines, a county elections official sends out an inquiry as to how Al Gore ended up with a vote-count of -16,022. That's NEGATIVE 16,022 -- which just happens also to have been the total number of votes cast for various independent and third-party candidates who also ran. (It was the largest number of such votes cast in Volusia County's history.)

Pay close attention to the final entry, from "Tab" (Talbot) Iredale, Vice President of Research & Development at Global/Diebold:

...The error could only occur in one of four ways:

1.Corrupt memory card. This is the most likely explanation for the problem but since I know nothing about the 'second' memory card I have no ability to confirm the probability of this.

2.Invalid read from good memory card. This is unlikely

since the candidates['] results for the race are not all

read at the same time and the corruption was limited to a single race. There is a possib[ili]ty that a section of

the memory card was bad but since I do not know anything more about the 'second' memory card I cannot validate this.

3.Corruption of memory, whether on the host or Accu-Vote. Again this is unlikely due to the localization of the

problem to a single race.

4.Invalid memory card (i.e., one that should not have been uploaded). There is always the possiblity that the

'second memory card' or 'second upload' came from an

unauthorised source.

And that's only the tip of the iceberg.