burden of proof on DCJ Mwilu she is NOT a sheep

Politics
User avatar
anonymousz
Level: Nobles
Posts: 842
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2016 7:28 am

burden of proof on DCJ Mwilu she is NOT a sheep

Unread post by anonymousz » Wed Sep 20, 2017 3:28 am

Image

User avatar
anonymousz
Level: Nobles
Posts: 842
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2016 7:28 am

Re: burden of proof on DCJ Mwilu she is NOT a sheep

Unread post by anonymousz » Wed Sep 20, 2017 3:35 am

<> do these folks write things they cannot even be able to read!
<> why did they throw the burden of proof to respondent ...

obienga
Level: Council of the gods
Posts: 5116
Joined: Thu Mar 21, 2013 7:28 pm

Re: burden of proof on DCJ Mwilu she is NOT a sheep

Unread post by obienga » Wed Sep 20, 2017 3:46 am

anonymousz wrote:
Wed Sep 20, 2017 3:35 am
<> do these folks write things they cannot even be able to read!
<> why did they throw the burden of proof to respondent ...
It is a miscarriage of justice, the parties might as well start immediately preparing for the next petition. Elections have ironically been reduced to an event by the judgment for the process can never be complied with if a KIEMS kit fails, the perfect process can only exist in text books. The only way for any compliance would be through infallible technology that does not currently exist in advanced economies.

All one needs to do is to make broad non-specific scrutiny demands that amount to a fishing expedition and if any of the broad far reaching demands are not met, then the respondent will be at fault. The court has effectively rubber stamped fishing expeditions for petitioners to go fishing for evidence they do not have in the first place.

User avatar
anonymousz
Level: Nobles
Posts: 842
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2016 7:28 am

Re: burden of proof on DCJ Mwilu she is NOT a sheep

Unread post by anonymousz » Wed Sep 20, 2017 4:09 am

did you hear CJ Maraga dwell on forms used? has he never traveled all over Kenya? I guarantee forms will NEVER be standard in Kenya ... his emphasis is on forms NOT substance: the vote. God have mercy on us ...
obienga wrote:
Wed Sep 20, 2017 3:46 am
anonymousz wrote:
Wed Sep 20, 2017 3:35 am
<> do these folks write things they cannot even be able to read!
<> why did they throw the burden of proof to respondent ...
It is a miscarriage of justice, the parties might as well start immediately preparing for the next petition. Elections have ironically been reduced to an event by the judgment for the process can never be complied with if a KIEMS kit fails, the perfect process can only exist in text books. The only way for any compliance would be through infallible technology that does not currently exist in advanced economies.

All one needs to do is to make broad non-specific scrutiny demands that amount to a fishing expedition and if any of the broad far reaching demands are not met, then the respondent will be at fault. The court has effectively rubber stamped fishing expeditions for petitioners to go fishing for evidence they do not have in the first place.

User avatar
anonymousz
Level: Nobles
Posts: 842
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2016 7:28 am

Re: burden of proof on DCJ Mwilu she is NOT a sheep

Unread post by anonymousz » Wed Sep 20, 2017 4:26 am

talk of IEBC transmission problems- judiciary Website has been down for days, and various contents removed ...
This site can’t be reached

www.judiciary.go.ke took too long to respond.
Search Google for judiciary go ke

obienga
Level: Council of the gods
Posts: 5116
Joined: Thu Mar 21, 2013 7:28 pm

Re: burden of proof on DCJ Mwilu she is NOT a sheep

Unread post by obienga » Wed Sep 20, 2017 4:46 am

All pure technicalities as you note. One need not even campaign seriously but should focus on how to petition or respond to a petition. Jakuon is evidently seized of this fact. Maraga now seems to be confirming that the standard of proof has shifted to respondents, and then he goes on in a moment of irony to deny that the court has not made it easy to overturn the will of the people.

The court will always reach the same conclusion if the anomalies remain the same per Maraga. The anomalies will be a low standard, a petitioner need only embark on a wild fishing expedition consisting of technology jargon that the court need not comprehend as to its relevance but will rule on the same regardless. It is clear that IEBC now have to overhaul their technology to be designed not primarily for the purpose of voting but for also the purpose of compliance with court ordered fishing expeditions for petitions will be inevitable with nearly all future elections unless Parliament acts to place parameters around this act of legislating from the bench.
anonymousz wrote:
Wed Sep 20, 2017 4:09 am
did you hear CJ Maraga dwell on forms used? has he never traveled all over Kenya? I guarantee forms will NEVER be standard in Kenya ... his emphasis is on forms NOT substance: the vote. God have mercy on us ...
obienga wrote:
Wed Sep 20, 2017 3:46 am
anonymousz wrote:
Wed Sep 20, 2017 3:35 am
<> do these folks write things they cannot even be able to read!
<> why did they throw the burden of proof to respondent ...
It is a miscarriage of justice, the parties might as well start immediately preparing for the next petition. Elections have ironically been reduced to an event by the judgment for the process can never be complied with if a KIEMS kit fails, the perfect process can only exist in text books. The only way for any compliance would be through infallible technology that does not currently exist in advanced economies.

All one needs to do is to make broad non-specific scrutiny demands that amount to a fishing expedition and if any of the broad far reaching demands are not met, then the respondent will be at fault. The court has effectively rubber stamped fishing expeditions for petitioners to go fishing for evidence they do not have in the first place.

User avatar
anonymousz
Level: Nobles
Posts: 842
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2016 7:28 am

Re: burden of proof on DCJ Mwilu she is NOT a sheep

Unread post by anonymousz » Wed Sep 20, 2017 6:57 am

Justice Ojwang to CJ Maraga ( by way of subtext ) Who is your daddy?

CJ Maraga schooled and highly quoted on the burden of proof, use of innuendos, conjectures, hearsay, generalities in an annulment of an election by Justice Ojwang ...

User avatar
anonymousz
Level: Nobles
Posts: 842
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2016 7:28 am

Re: burden of proof on DCJ Mwilu she is NOT a sheep

Unread post by anonymousz » Wed Sep 20, 2017 7:30 am

" physical vote MUST be the basis of election an decision" Justice Ojwang

FARAJA
Level: Imperial Majesty
Posts: 2323
Joined: Mon Nov 04, 2013 11:06 am

Re: burden of proof on DCJ Mwilu she is NOT a sheep

Unread post by FARAJA » Wed Sep 20, 2017 7:35 am

Justice Maraga and Mwilu are incompetent hacks who should be thrown out pronto.

Wanjala skipped the reading in the hope he'll replace Maraga. I doubt Lenaola, Wanjala, or Mwilu will replace Maraga in 4 years.
There are people who want to engage in ad hominem abuse all day long on online forums, spewing bile in a seemingly unending stream.

These are, in fact, the most uneducated amongst us.

obienga
Level: Council of the gods
Posts: 5116
Joined: Thu Mar 21, 2013 7:28 pm

Re: burden of proof on DCJ Mwilu she is NOT a sheep

Unread post by obienga » Wed Sep 20, 2017 7:59 am

anonymousz wrote:
Wed Sep 20, 2017 6:57 am
Justice Ojwang to CJ Maraga ( by way of subtext ) Who is your daddy?

CJ Maraga schooled and highly quoted on the burden of proof, use of innuendos, conjectures, hearsay, generalities in an annulment of an election by Justice Ojwang ...
Ojwang promised he would show why there was no evidence on record and he went to work. Maraga preemptively complained about the thousands of pages on record, and delivers a judgment several days later clearly written in part by others other than the Maraga 4.

During Mwilu's reading, lawyers were referred to by name as opposed to the first or third respondents counsel with adjectives describing their arguments rather than the substance giving away a possible thinly veiled attack on the persona rather than the substance which could in turn imply a personal bias. This again implies that the judgment was likely written in part by clerks or inexperienced lawyers than the judges. At one point Mwilu sounded as though she was arguing the case for the petitioner rather than evaluating the evidence before the court.

If Ojwang can deliver such a well reasoned detailed opinion why can't the Maraga 4 do better or equal to him?

User avatar
anonymousz
Level: Nobles
Posts: 842
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2016 7:28 am

Re: burden of proof on DCJ Mwilu she is NOT a sheep

Unread post by anonymousz » Wed Sep 20, 2017 8:15 am

two SCORK opposing the decision, two running away, and three Tibim/NASA hawa
FARAJA wrote:
Wed Sep 20, 2017 7:35 am
Chief Justice Maraga and Deputy Chief Justice Mwilu are incompetent hacks who should be thrown out pronto.

Wanjala skipped the reading in the hope he'll replace Maraga. I doubt Lenaola, Wanjala, or Mwilu will replace Maraga in 4 years.

User avatar
anonymousz
Level: Nobles
Posts: 842
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2016 7:28 am

Re: burden of proof on DCJ Mwilu she is NOT a sheep

Unread post by anonymousz » Wed Sep 20, 2017 8:17 am

not sure what Mwilu used to get that high up in the legal system ...
obienga wrote:
Wed Sep 20, 2017 7:59 am
anonymousz wrote:
Wed Sep 20, 2017 6:57 am
Justice Ojwang to CJ Maraga ( by way of subtext ) Who is your daddy?

CJ Maraga schooled and highly quoted on the burden of proof, use of innuendos, conjectures, hearsay, generalities in an annulment of an election by Justice Ojwang ...
Ojwang promised he would show why there was no evidence on record and he went to work. Maraga preemptively complained about the thousands of pages on record, and delivers a judgment several days later clearly written in part by others other than the Maraga 4.

During Mwilu's reading, lawyers were referred to by name as opposed to the first or third respondents counsel with adjectives describing their arguments rather than the substance giving away a possible thinly veiled attack on the persona rather than the substance which could in turn imply a personal bias. This again implies that the judgment was likely written in part by clerks or inexperienced lawyers than the judges. At one point Mwilu sounded as though she was arguing the case for the petitioner rather than evaluating the evidence before the court.

If Ojwang can deliver such a well reasoned detailed opinion why can't the Maraga 4 do better or equal to him?

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AntiHubris, Higgins the genius, SaltyLight, vooke, Yahoo [Bot] and 22 guests