I’m guessing this could go in the Stupid Republican thread, but I don’t feel like trying to find evidence that this guy is a republican (but I’m assuming he is).
I think the only time I’ve mentioned this is in an unrelated thread from a few years ago and I didn’t want to bump it:
The short version is that he wanted to prove that the absentee voting system makes it easy to commit fraud and in order to prove it, he committed some fraud. He requested absentee ballots for some city/state officials and then told them about it.
The court case has finally started with the two sides making the expected arguments. Wait’s defense is saying that he was just trying to show that the system has vulnerabilities while the state argues that exploiting said vulnerabilities is illegal, period.
“The question for you is one question. It needs to be the guiding question that you examine all of the evidence through, and it’s this. In Harry’s crusade to expose MyVote’s vulnerabilities, did he violate these statutes? That’s the question,” Bugni said.
The defense says Wait emailed Vos, Mason, the district attorney and the sheriff about six hours after requesting the ballots, emphasizing his intent to highlight potential flaws rather than commit fraud. The defense claims it is all about the intention.
The defense is leaning on the intent side of things. I suppose it’s understandable for a few reasons. One, it’s probably all they have going for them and two, IIRC, he tried, or claimed he tried to let TPTB know about this vulnerability and they didn’t listen to him so he showed them. Ron Johnson called him a white hat hacker.
And, while he has his vocal supporters in the court of public opinion, I’m guessing this will be a slam dunk for the state. Here’s the two charges:
943.201(2)(a) Misappropriate ID Info - Obtain Money
(2) Whoever, for any of the following purposes, intentionally uses, attempts to use, or possesses with intent to use any personal identifying information or personal identification document of an individual, including a deceased individual, without the authorization or consent of the individual and by representing that he or she is the individual, that he or she is acting with the authorization or consent of the individual, or that the information or document belongs to him or her is guilty of a Class H felony:
(a)To obtain credit, money, goods, services, employment, or any other thing of value or benefit.
and
12.13(3)(i) Election Fraud-Fraud/Absentee Ballot
No person may falsely make any statement for the purpose of obtaining or voting an absentee ballot under ss. 6.85 to 6.87.
Regarding intent, for the first charge, he pretty clearly intentionally used personally identifying information with the intent of acquiring the absentee ballots. There’s no exception for doing it to prove a point.
The second statute makes no mention of intent, and statutes are usually pretty good about adding a ‘with intent to…’ clause when they feel it’s important. Also, even if it did mention intent, he still intentionally made a false statement for the purpose of obtaining a ballot. Again, no exception for doing it to prove a point.
I’m guessing this is will, at least in part, be the state’s argument. It seems pretty black and white to me.
The other argument I’m guessing they’ll make is that he set out to show how easy to commit election fraud with absentee ballots. However, the fact that he’s in court defending himself against election fraud charges shows that the system is working, he didn’t get away with it. Granted that’s not quite ‘fair’ since he essentially turned himself in, but I imagine them gliding over that detail. In any case, from the state’s POV, this seems like a ‘dead to rights’ case. I don’t see how this doesn’t result in a guilty verdict and probably jail time for him. My prediction, when this is all said and done, 30 Days in jail and $1000-$5000 fine.