They will not be showing us the voter logs (the book where the voters sign in).
They will not be showing us the provisional ballots that were rejected, nor will they tell us how many were rejector nor why they were rejected.
They refused to do a forensic audit and refused to let us check that the seal of the PROM was intact.
The only comparisons made were between the printouts from the internal memory and the cartridge for each voting machine in the wards/divisions that were recounted. We did not see any aggregated information.
One machine (#23416 for 08/09) had a bent pin where the cartridge is inserted. They were not able to retrieve the data from memory since the machine won’t print without a cartridge in the slot, even though it is a blank cartridge and they are printing from memory. They will confer with their council before decided what to do with this one.
All the machines were running on batteries. One machine (#23389 for 05/08) had a dead battery and had to be plugged in.
The building has very poor physical security. There is an alarm system, but there are many windows both on the walls and the roof of the building.
Paper recount ward/division 01/14 at 2:09 shows how a discrepancy was handled.