KAKAMPI MO ANG BATAS.SYNDICATED, ENGLISH. 29 JUNE 2013 Here’s proof of PCOS tampering, padding LIFE’S INSPIRATION: “… `and the truth shall set you free’…” (Jesus Christ, our God and Savior, in John 8:32, the Holy Bible). -ooo- PROOF OF PCOS TAMPERING AND MANIPULATION: If the Commission on Elections is looking for proof that the results of the May 2013 elections may have been manipulated through the Precinct Count Optical Scan (PCOS) machines, it should act speedily and with dispatch on the case filed with it by a group of Pasay City residents who showed in their petition that the votes in about 300 precincts in the city were tampered with and clearly padded. Our readers here will please pardon my referring to this case because I happen to be the lawyer of the Pasay City residents, but then I could not help but bring this out, in reaction to the published refusal of Chairman Sixto Brillantes Jr. and of Malacanang to conduct a manual recount of the votes for the 2013 elections, as requested by various civil society groups, allegedly because there is no proof of any pre-programming or manipulation of the votes. With due respect to Brillantes and to Malacanang, the manipulation and pre-programming of the poll results are very much evident from the statement of votes which came out from the very PCOS machines that were used in Pasay City, according to the petition that the city residents filed with the Comelec last Tuesday, June 25, 2013. In fact, in that petition, the residents specifically identified the 300 or so precincts which showed this manipulation and pre-programming. -ooo- PASAY CITY RESIDENTS RAP PCOS RESULTS: Here are some parts of that petition which also contained an urgent prayer for a manual count of the votes, at least in Pasay City: “Legally, Petitioners, as residents and registered voters of Pasay City, are entitled to know who among the four mayoralty candidates in their city---Wenceslao Trinidad, Antonio G. Calixto, Jorge del Rosario and Romulo Marcelo---really won as their mayor during the May 13, 2013 elections… “Based on what they personally witnessed, experienced, came to know of, and discerned on election day, it is clear to the Petitioners herein that while Respondent Antonio G. Calixto got proclaimed as the duly-elected mayor of Pasay City, that proclamation was null and void, as there was a failure of election in the city… “Why are Petitioners saying that there was a failure of elections in Pasay City during the May 13, 2013 elections? The first reason is that, the results that led to the proclamation of the Respondent (Calixto) as mayor-elect were statistically and mathematically improbable, and appeared to have been the product of massive electronic and automated fraud arising from glaring, blatant and deliberate violations of Republic Act 8792, which is otherwise known as the Electronic Commerce Act of 2000… -ooo- MISMATCH OF ELECTRONIC POLL DATA: The petition went on to explain that an “examination of the official statement of votes which (Petitioners) gathered initially from 300 precincts in the city showed that the electronic data reflected in those statement of votes and produced by the PCOS machines in those precincts did not match with one another... “To show this in more concrete form: In Clustered Precincts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 27, 28, 46, 47, 48 and 49 under District 1 of Pasay City, the total number of ballots that were allegedly counted by the PCOS machines… amounted to only 7,547, but, the total number of all votes credited to all the four mayoralty candidates totaled a whooping 9,045… Clearly, there was here an inexplicable, and therefore, greatly fraudulent, mismatch of electronic data… which showed an excess of 1,858 votes that the PCOS machines supposedly counted… “The same massive mismatch and incapacity of being authenticated of electronic data are also manifested in Clustered Precincts 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, and 56, and (in Clustered Precincts 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, and 150)…” Now, can anyone really explain how these discrepancies came about, except to say that the results were manipulated and padded? This is the proof that Comelec perhaps needs. I will print the other portions of the petition next issue. -ooo- REACTIONS? Please call me at 0917 984 24 68, 0918 574 0193, 0922 833 43 96. Email: batasmauricio@yahoo, mmauriciojr111@gmail. -30-
Posted on: Fri, 28 Jun 2013 22:05:28 +0000