Said Crystal Mason, quoted in "Woman Who Received 5-Year Sentence in Voter Fraud Case Is Acquitted/A Texas appeals court reversed its earlier opinion that had upheld the conviction of Crystal Mason, who was found guilty of illegally casting a provisional ballot in 2016, even though she claimed she hadn’t known she was ineligible to vote" (NYT).
Mason, a convicted felon, was ineligible to vote, and the question was whether the prosecution needed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she knew she was ineligible.
Was Mason used in a political ploy? Did blackness matter? She says yes to both questions, and your opinion may depend on whether you're a Republican or a Democrat. If so, doesn't that tend to prove it was a political ploy? But who has the burden of proof on that? Nobody. And no one will ever definitively answer that question. You already know what you believe. And in that fog, who wants to see Crystal Mason spend 5 years in prison? Not the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals.
Posts
72 comments:
Well said. The ones who should go to prison are the people caught stuffing hundreds of ballots into ballot boxes at the eleventh hour, or those who show up after the polls close with 10,000 “found” ballots. That’s where the real abuses are, that and the tens of thousands of college students who vote absentee at home and in person at school. In elections hinging on 5,000-7,000 votes in key states, those are the frauds that matter.
If she was ineligible to vote, the problem is the system that still allowed her vote.
"...your opinion may depend on whether you're a Republican or a Democrat."
Maybe so, but this independent sees no reason why Mason, who has served her sentence, should not regain all her voting rights. And all other ex-felons.
For that matter, why should felons serving their time even lose their voting rights?
So, if I read this right, the law is completely ineffective if all you have to do is say “I didn’t know”.
How many other laws does this decision invalidate?
Purposeful incompetence allows for things like this to happen. If you're a felon, and not allowed to vote...why isn't your name on a list that prevents you from voting, or filters out the vote you cast. Same for citizenship.
This is why Democrats love absentee ballots, oppose voter ID, make election day last six weeks...and refuse to clean up state voter rolls...
It's all to create fog to promote fraud... Soon Democrats will either provide amnesty to allow all the illegal immigrants who crossed the border during the Biden years to vote, or they will just look the other way.
The Southern border situation is simply to import votes for Democrats. That's it.
She sounds like a helpless victim of racism to me. If we want to make a better, fairer world, we need to include the direction and advise of felons in our electoral process because they live among us. Otherwise, the victims will be victimized every single day.
You can't argue with this kind of logic. I hope I'm still around to read the story they publish for the immigrants who will be charged with similar crimes in this election, only to be released from that burden in 2030 or so. So much crying. So much praying.
Any hope of characterizing felons voting for Democrats as illegal voter fraud? It’s handing millions of votes to Democrats…
wait until she learns about split ends....
The correct answer is- if you’re ineligible to vote you shouldn’t have access to a ballot. The system failed her and she paid a price but we shouldn’t abandon rule of law to accommodate every whim Democrats demand…
Of interest:
Biden Can Expand Voting Access Through His Executive Order (ACLU)
Salient quotes:
"The Department of Education should add a voter registration opportunity for applicants using the Free Application for Federal Student Aid."
"The Bureau of Prisons, the agency within the Department of Justice which oversees federal prison facilities, and the U.S. Marshals Service, which oversees people in federal pre-trial custody, amongst other activities, can also fully implement the executive order. While both agencies have made efforts to improve voter access for eligible voters who are currently incarcerated in federal prisons or held in federal pre-trial custody, there is still more that can be done to ensure full implementation of systems facilitating civic engagement and access to the ballot. You can read more about the steps they can take
here."
Russ Feingold has promoted voting for felons once they've been released from prison but before they've completed probation. See the ACLU article here.
Jersey,
We call that the Steve Martin defense.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zXmQW_aqBks
Blogger john said...
For that matter, why should felons serving their time even lose their voting rights?
Yes felonies are not all the same. Do you want convicted murders voting? Rapists? Child molesters? Drug dealers?
You vote to elect people to make laws. If you can't follow the law yourself, especially committing felonies, then you probably shouldn't be making them.
Don't commit felonies = maintain your right to vote. Easy.
I’ve always read that ignorance of the law is no excuse. But I also believe once you have served your time, your voting rights should be restored.
Mason, a convicted felon, was ineligible to vote, and the question was whether the prosecution needed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she knew she was ineligible.
Unfortunately, we have reached the point where Government in general, has devolved into little fiefdoms of power. Those pockets of power are driven by individual narratives. Corrupt prosecutors with an agenda, seek out a judge of the same mind, and rule of law and citizens are sacrificed. All to feed tiny egos.
About ten years ago I changed my position on the Death Penalty. Even back then it was clear Prosecutors knew they were free to lie, in order to get their preferred outcome.
Its only metastasized since then.
I am curious about her previous federal conviction.
"...even though she claimed she didn't know she was ineligible to vote."
Well, she would say that, wouldn't she?
Blogger Antiantifa said...
...and the tens of thousands of college students who vote absentee at home and in person at school
And the Universities indoctrinate and brainwash these kids into believing this is ok...even a moral imperative to cast as many votes for Democrats as possible.
If a student gets caught voting in Madison, and submitting an absentee ballot in...California, the hammer should come down... but it won't. Madison, WI supports this type of fraud to keep power concentrated in that crazy town.
And think of all of those illegals in Texas who can now happily vote in November’s election.
I’m sure those activists are anonymously printing up those “you can vote” fliers even as we speak.
I for-got, armed robbery, was illegal.
-Steve Martin
She got lucky, because she deliberately chose the most difficult path.
See this, from a 2021 NYT article about the case:
Tarrant County Criminal District Attorney’s Office said in a statement:
“Our office offered Mason the option of probation in this case, which she refused,” the statement said. “Mason waived a trial by jury and chose to proceed to trial before the trial judge.”
Most likely she's a victim of activist advice.
d race card spelled backwards is d race card…
"why should felons serving their time even lose their voting rights?"
Because we don't want to be governed by people chosen by felons?
I'm an Republican election officer in Kentucky, and if I knowingly allow an ineligible vote to be cast I can be prosecuted, too. Texas law may be different but in KY a provisional ballot can be cast if there is a dispute about voter eligibility, which is then ruled on by the county election board.
Something is fishy about this. I would feel differently if it was not a provisional ballot but from that I gather, assuming Texas law is similar to Kentucky, that the precinct folks handled things correctly and her provisional ballot should have simply been rejected.
The underlying question is if she worked with others to strategize to break the law for a political goal. Per the many Machiavellian partisans in politics:
1. Choose a sympathetic person to break a law the group wants to avoid or end
2. Break the law and collaborate/bribe the media for sympathetic publicity
3. Emphasize the person's positive characteristics over the law breaking
4. Denigrate the law as harming kind/innocent persons unfairly
5. Use the publicity to distract from problematic severe lawbreaking / ballot stuffing
6. Scream "racism" at anyone who criticizes people for breaking the law
7. Keep on bribing because oligarchs are gonna oligarch. It's what they do.
Are provisional ballots adjudicated or scrutinized in some way before being counted?
5 years for 1 person and 1 faulty ballot is Trumpian level punishment. So, no.
Per both CNN and MSNBC, it appears that Mason did not serve any of the five year sentence for voter fraud. She has been free since conviction on an appeal bond. She signed an affidavit that set forth the restrictions on voting, but said she didn't think they applied to her because she was on supervised release for her prior conviction for tax fraud, having previously been in jail.
Meh. A heedless crook asserts voting rights in the face of several warnings.
We can have a totally effective and auditable system if we want one.
The people in charge don’t want one.
Anyone who displays the level of affinity for identity politics that this woman does almost certainly has an accompanying sense of entitlement that makes one feel that they ought not have to follow any inconvenient rules. Like rules that prohibit convicted felons from voting. Her claims of ignorance are not credible.
Let him who never signed a form without reading it cast the first stone.
She cast "provisional ballot" who is responsible for checking the eligibility of people casting provisional ballots. Why did she cast a provisional ballot?
Let him who never signed a form without reading it cast the first stone.
Every software TOS. I read a couple of paragraphs - skim a couple - then scroll to the end.
I guess I thought eligibility rules for federal elections at least would be similar state by state. Keep forgetting about federalism. Had to look it up but in Ohio felons are restricted from voting only while incarcerated. After release or while on probation is ok but you would have to re-register. Can even vote absentee while in jail on felony charges. No disenfranchisement here…..
Blogger Ann Althouse said...
Let him who never signed a form without reading it cast the first stone.
I don't see anyone here throwing stones at Ms. Mason.
The criticism is of the the voting system which is purposefully designed to let stuff like this happen, as well as many other forms of voter fraud.
We have a right to throw stones at a voting system we know has been corrupted by Democrats. We all know it's true. Democrats know it's true...they just want to benefit from the voter fraud.
I agree with the overturning of the verdict- the prosecution should have to prove she knew what she was doing was illegal. I don't like prosecuting people using laws that a reasonable person might not know exist. Even worse, this was a provisional ballot- one where it was a requirement that the state determine whether or not gets counted based on the rules for the election.
Now, do I think she was lying about not knowing this? Yes, I do, but I can't prove it beyond a reasonable doubt without direct testimony from the defendant.
And, yes- lots of people sign forms that they don't read.
Whatever happened to Ignorantia juris non excusat?
"Whatever happened to Ignorantia juris non excusat?"
That's why the case took so long to come to get where it is.
"...your opinion may depend on whether you're a Republican or a Democrat." This assumes that Democrats believe this kind of bullshit. Only about half are that stupid.
"A free black woman?" Really?
"Let him who never signed a form without reading it cast the first stone."
Heh...ouch!
But I do think this case was a setup by both sides to test the Texas law.
Mason, a convicted felon, was ineligible to vote, and the question was whether the prosecution needed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she knew she was ineligible.
It would be trivial to have voter roles that were instantly queryable. Our credit card payments system is infinitely more complicated and provides instant settlement.
With a drivers license a database with a 1 second max query time could be created for all 100ish million legal registered voters in the country.
The fact that this does not exist and we do not have a transparent election system is the crime.
Everyone who administers our election system should be thrown in jail. Not this woman.
I could put together a transparent election system that had instant finality that was open source without much difficulty. There is only one reason we have a ridiculously and obviously fraudulent mail in absentee no voter ID system where people aren't even sure if they can vote or not.
I hope and pray every moment of that woman’s life was hell for 5 years and that she eventually be returned to a cage.
Ann Althouse said...
Let him who never signed a form without reading it cast the first stone.
You are purposely misunderstanding our point here.
The people who should be in jail are the people that have made our election system the way it is.
How can you not have an instantly queryable public database for registered voters? It is one of the most basic societal functions we have. It is only this way to promote obvious fraud and depress actual voter turnout.
People wonder why congress has a 14% favorability rating and a 95% re-election rate. This is why. Everyone involved in this is corrupt. That is the point.
“Whatever happened to Ignorantia juris non excusat?
That's why the case took so long to come to get where it is.”
Because it was written in Latin?
hawkeyedjb said...
"why should felons serving their time even lose their voting rights?"
Because we don't want to be governed by people chosen by felons?
We need to go further than this.
Voting should be limited to people who pay net positive taxes and/or have and raised children.
Isn't the definition of "provisional ballot" an uncertainty about eligibility? I'm with the people who say the system is at fault.
I think once you've served your criminal sentence, and you are free and walking around, you're a citizen again. And I think you should have all the rights of other citizens. Having a class of second-class citizens is always a bad idea.
Better to adopt the Christian way. Once you've paid the sanction, you're redeemed.
Stripping people of their right to vote -- and other rights -- is a lifetime punishment. I don't know if it's "cruel and unusual," but it is wrong.
My experience with felons is that no one officially tells them they can't vote. It's just assumed their supposed to know they can't vote. Why wouldn't they be confused, Hillary and the left have been trying for decades to let convicts in prison vote.
Ms. Mason faced five years in a Texas prison. To put that in perspective, it’s the equivalent of a white man getting a $5,000 fine or almost 100 hour of community service.
Based on our election officer training in Kentucky I suspect the rules covering provisional ballots are Federal. At least in Kentucky only Federal, not state, races appear on them. Unless Texas has state provisional ballots they are likely following the same Federal rules. We are instructed to give a provisional ballot to a person who can't prove they are eligible to vote based on Kentucky rules but insists on voting and is willing to vote on only Federal races. The ballot is identified with the person's name and other information, and handled separately from standard ballots. Provisional ballots are reviewed by the county election board, and either included or excluded based on their judgement. Assuming the voter gives correct information and isn't trying to perpetrate fraud in that way, it should be easy to verify their voting status at that point.
Gusty Winds said...
Blogger Ann Althouse said...
Let him who never signed a form without reading it cast the first stone.
I don't see anyone here throwing stones at Ms. Mason.
The criticism is of the the voting system which is purposefully designed to let stuff like this happen, as well as many other forms of voter fraud.
We have a right to throw stones at a voting system we know has been corrupted by Democrats. We all know it's true. Democrats know it's true...they just want to benefit from the voter fraud.
3/29/24, 8:40 AM
The WORST part was blaming this on race. Race has nothing to do with it.
Voting rules for convicted felons in Wisconsin (ACLU of Wisconsin):
"Do I have to get a pardon or permission from the government to vote, once I’m “off paper” for my felony?
You do NOT have to get a pardon to get your voting rights back. Your voting rights are automatically restored as soon as you complete your felony sentence and are “off paper.”
I’ve been charged with a felony, but I haven’t been convicted yet. Can I vote?
If you have been charged with a felony but not yet convicted, you can vote.
If you’ve been convicted of a felony but haven’t been sentenced, you cannot vote."
Source: VOTING RIGHTS FOR PERSONS WITH CRIMINAL CONVICTIONS
Jersey Fled said...
Because it was written in Latin?
I actually laughed out loud at that. I'm still kind of giggling.
If the burden of proof is on the state and can't prove it, I'm not sure how you convict her.
Of course, that means tens of thousands of people can vote illegally and claim ignorance of the law, which isn't supposed to be a defense.
But it also means that prosecutors can't claim to know that Trump believed he actually lost the election.
One way to solve this for felons is to have every one sign a form when they are released that lays out their rights or lack thereof.
It can be done orally to those who are illiterate and recorded.
"And in that fog, who wants to see Crystal Mason spend 5 years in prison? Not the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals."
Me neither. Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, knew exactly what she was doing, and why. We should convene a blue-ribbon panel to determine exactly what fungus she should be rotting in prison with. "With"? Maybe "from"? Not sure how to fix that. "... to select a fungus to rot her in prison"?
St. Croix, she had not served her time for what must have been some pretty serious tax fraud, based on her sentence. She served five years in prison and still had three years of probation to fulfill her sentence. I'd take a hard look at her probation officer and any activist groups who may have set her up with the belief that she was entitled to vote when she was not. Then again, she's also a pretty accomplished grifter. The article doesn't offer enough information. Did she tell the voting site employee that she was on probation? She knew something was wrong when she had to cast a provisional ballot. Ordinarily, the employee would call a superior to determine why she needed to cast a provisional vote. Ordinarily, she would have been informed by her parole officer and also at release from prison that she could not vote until her parole was complete.
How much money do you think she's making off this, from donations and NGOs? That should be in the story too.
This time, one hopes she pays taxes on it.
“Let him who never signed a form without reading it cast the first stone.”
But you are a Lawyer, does not this statement invalidate all laws and contracts?
Ann Althouse said...
"Whatever happened to Ignorantia juris non excusat?"
That's why the case took so long to come to get where it is.
No. The reason this case took so long is because our "Justice System" is festooned with corrupt judges who are keeping this corrupt and ridiculous election fraud system going.
"Stripping people of their right to vote -- and other rights -- is a lifetime punishment. I don't know if it's "cruel and unusual," but it is wrong."
Regarding voting as a "right" -- as opposed to a responsibility -- is why democracies inevitably become tyrannies. The founders fondly imagined that citizens would vote for the interest of their nation, rather than for their own narrow interest. The fact that there is some truth in that idea is the reason the Democrats are so intent on allowing non-citizens to vote. Every looter a voter, and every voter a looter!
"Whatever happened to Ignorantia juris non excusat?"
Heh. It came up against the Comey Doctrine;
"To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences.
Ah, I'd forgotten. It was before COVID, after all. It seems so long ago, back when we were still surprised to discover that a high government official was a criminal piece of shit;
"Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case." No reasonable prosecutor. Meaning, neither Fani Willis, nor Alvin Bragg.
"Woman Who Received 5-Year Sentence in Voter Fraud Case Is Acquitted/A Texas appeals court reversed its earlier opinion that had upheld the conviction of Crystal Mason, who was found guilty of illegally casting a provisional ballot in 2016, even though she claimed she hadn’t known she was ineligible to vote" (NYT).
Mason, a convicted felon, was ineligible to vote, and the question was whether the prosecution needed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she knew she was ineligible.
And yet that bitch Susan B. Anthony knew perfectly well, and got off scot free. She’s even on a U.S. coin. Where is justice?
If there was a voter ID system in place, this wouldn't have happened. There's not, mainly because Democrats are opposed to verifying the legitimacy of the votes they're harvesting.
I wonder which party the candidates Ms. Crystal voted for belonged to?
The decision answers most of the questions people are asking.
1. Her provisional ballot was rejected. So the system worked.
2. She obviously lied like a rug at trial.
3. That worked because the Republican judge bent over backwards to make this go away.
4. Five years was too heavy a sentence considering the facts of the case. Her vote wasn't counted.
5. "Ignorance of the law" does not apply when the law in question specifically requires knowledge that an action violates that law.
Jupiter said...
Regarding voting as a "right" -- as opposed to a responsibility -- is why democracies inevitably become tyrannies. The founders fondly imagined that citizens would vote for the interest of their nation, rather than for their own narrow interest. The fact that there is some truth in that idea is the reason the Democrats are so intent on allowing non-citizens to vote. Every looter a voter, and every voter a looter!
Well stated.
Anyone receiving a paycheck from the government should not be able to vote. They contribute nothing.
That includes politicians and government employees.
"Stripping people of their right to vote -- and other rights -- is a lifetime punishment. I don't know if it's "cruel and unusual," but it is wrong."
Jesus, St. Croix. Aren't you some kind of a God-botherer? Do you have a single, solitary virtue that you have not paraded publicly until it's sunburned? I suppose it is true, that we should all feel a certain delicate solicitude for those who have had the extreme misfortune to have been convicted of doing something likely worse than just illegal. That must be rough, alright. But somehow, I don't think losing the "right" to vote is the worst of it. Many people have had long and happy lives, without ever once voting. Now, if we were talking about taking away their right to drink, that might be grounds for concern.
Was Mason used in a political ploy?
Republican ploys are called out as ploys. Here we play along with Democrat ploys for years, burying the mumbly recognition in a boring post late in the day…
All felons are convicted felons.
Since when does intent matter? I keep hearing that ignorance is no excuse, that we have to know the laws, no matter how esoteric and bizarre they may be? Which is it? If you have no intent, then it is not illegal? How can you have laws at all if that is the case? How to you ever prove intent?
They didn't allow her to vote. They allowed her to cast a provisional ballot because she wasn't on the voter roll. Provisional ballots are then subjected to heightened inspection and accepted or rejected.
I had to cast a provisional ballot once because I had just moved and registered. I had to go back with my lease,etc. within a week to appeal. By then they had double-checked my registration and counted the vote. But they did take me aside at the poll and try to figure out why I wasn't on the list. Each polling center has a supervisor to do this. They asked me several questions from a form: was I still registered elsewhere, did I recently change my name and forget to re-register, was I on probation or parole, had I lost my rights permanently due to committing a serious crime? I know another person who had the same experience in a different state.
What happenned here? Activists promising her money.
Post a Comment