Seems like a user error since hand recount changed 1 vote. Not sure that means much
Ms. Martin said that the hand audit showed that they were off by one vote from the original count, but now, following the recount, Coffee County’s tally was off by 51 votes. Further, the county’s tally was showing two batch uploads of 50 ballots each. It became apparent that Ms. Martin was unsure whether she had scanned a batch of 50 ballots twice, which would account for the 50-vote discrepancy
“Any system, financial, voting, or otherwise, that is not repeatable nor dependable should not be used,” officials wrote in the letter. “To demand certification of patently inaccurate results neither serves the objective of the electoral system nor satisfies the legal obligation to certify the electronic recount.”
Bumping this to get up to the top
Same county refused to certify because of lack of reliable system. SOC Raffensperger now wants to take them down. Here's their letter.
https://www.walb.com/2020/12/08/letter-coffee-co-cannot-certify-results-second-statewide-recount/
Seems like a user error since hand recount changed 1 vote. Not sure that means much
The point is that the investigation was filed after these videos showing the system was dropped. This shows how easily corrupted it could be.
From part of their letter not certifying.
“Any system, financial, voting, or otherwise, that is not repeatable nor dependable should not be used,” officials wrote in the letter. “To demand certification of patently inaccurate results neither serves the objective of the electoral system nor satisfies the legal obligation to certify the electronic recount.”