Ivan's Case

I dealt with it, though I think he'll start to give us trouble. He seems to be a bit upset that he lost to me in the election. Feel free to split our posts out from that thread if it annoys either of you, I left them in for the record.

His original case is moot either way. He participated in the recent election which technically vacated his original court filing claim. Ergo, if the first election was 'fouled' as he claims, he would have not participated in this election.

And besides, proving the motivation and intents of Jamie is impossible given the 'evidence' presented. If I complained about every election I lost because someone slandered me, the court would be adjudicating for the next 1000 years.

I also object to the idea that slander has been connected with the term "election fraud" at all. Election fraud is vote rigging, counting phony votes, etc. Slander is part and parcel of politics.

I think we need to inform people of the rules of evidence as a means of reducing the filing of frivolous suits at law and criminal complaints. Should Jamie have filed the complaint against Ivan in the first place? Probably not given the nature of the 'evidence' as being so thin as to be nearly invisible. Does it constitute 'election fraud'? No. It constitutes frustration and Jamie's complaint should have been promptly dismissed and frivolous in pure legal terms.