The Idaho Republican Party v Ysursa

Filing 67

ORDER. The parties submitted electronic copies of depositions with the objections included as electronic sticky notes. The Court has written its rulings to the objections on those same electronic sticky notes. The Court will attach a print out of the relevant depositions pages, along with the electronic sticky notes, to this Order. These will constitute the Court's ruling on the objections. Signed by Judge B. Lynn Winmill. (Attachments: # 1 Adams, # 2 Barrett, # 3 Beck, # 4 Bowers, # 5 Kulczyk, # 6 Mansfield, # 7 Maxwell, # 8 Ripley, # 9 Vance)(caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by cjm)

The Idaho Republican Party v Ysursa

Doc. 67 Att. 1

Page 2

Page 4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

THE TELEPHONIC DEPOSITION OF STEVE ADAMS was taken on behalf of the Defendant at the Attorney General's Office, 954 West Jefferson Street, 2nd Floor, Boise, Idaho, commencing at 1:07 p.m. on Tuesday, September 21, 2010, before Emily L. Nord, Certified Shorthand Reporter and Notary Public within and for the State of Idaho, in the above-entitled matter. APPEARANCES For the Plaintiffs: Troupis Law Office, P.A. BY MR. CHRIST T. TROUPIS 1299 East Iron Eagle, Suite 130 P.O. Box 2408 Eagle, ID 83616 For the Defendant: Office of the Attorney General BY MR. MICHAEL S. GILMORE Deputy Attorney General Civil Litigation Division 954 West Jefferson Street P.O. Box 83720 Boise, ID 83720-0010 (Appearances continued . . . )
Page 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

INDEX TESTIMONY OF STEVE ADAMS Examination by Mr. Gilmore Examination by Mr. Allen Examination by Mr. Troupis Further Examination by Mr. Gilmore PAGE 7 27 48 56

EXHIBITS NO. DESCRIPTION 1. Affidavit of Steve Adams PAGE 5

Page 5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A P P E A R A N C E S (Continued) For the Defendant: Givens Pursley, LLP BY MR. GARY G. ALLEN 601 West Bannock Street P.O. Box 2720 Boise, ID 83701-2720

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

PROCEEDINGS (Exhibit 1 marked.) MR. GILMORE: This is Michael Gilmore. This is the Steve Adams deposition. Gary? MR. ALLEN: Gary Allen with Givens Pursley, representing the Intervenors. MR. TROUPIS: And Christ Troupis, representing the Idaho Republican Party. 1 MR. GILMORE: And I forgot to say, I represent the Secretary of State. Before we call Mr. Adams, I will make the following objections: I object to paragraph 6, and to Exhibit C, to the extent that they are offered for the truth of the matters attributed to Beverly Beach. I object to paragraph 7, to the extent that it is offered for the truth of the matters concerning what Beverly Beach or other Democrats did or did not do in the 2004 primary election. I object to paragraph 8, to the extent that it assumes a fact not in evidence, that there was a strategic crossover vote. I object to paragraph 9, to the extent
2 (Pages 2 to 5)

[phone]

M & M COURT REPORTING

[phone] (fax)

Dockets.Justia.com

Summary of Comments on Adams Deposition.ptx
Page: 2
Number: 1 Author: csmith Objections to Adams Affidavit Subject: Sticky Note Date: 10/8/2010 3:30:06 PM

Author: lwinmill Subject: Sticky Note Date: 10/11/2010 8:58:18 PM Overrule as to para. 6. Statement is offered without regard for its truth, since the fact that Beach made the statement inviting Democrats to vote in the Republican primary has independent relevance. Overruled as to para. 7. It is offered again not for the truth of the matter asserted, but for the fact that it was stated in a public forum as a statement by a Democratic candidate inviting other democrats to crossover. It does not suggest what Democrats have or have not done, only what they should do. Overruled as to para 8, 9, 10 and 13, since the reference to a "strategic crossover vote" refers to what Beach suggested Democrats should do, and this in the record. Sustain as to para 13 and 14 to the extent that they opine as to his legal rights. Overrule as to para 15 for reasons stated above.

Page 38

Page 40

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

were a Democrat crossing over to vote in the Republican primary? A. Meet them and talk to them personally? Q. Yes. A. I did meet Bev several times, and I know she did. But I didn't -- I didn't campaign with Democrats. I campaigned with Republicans. 1 Q. Did Bev tell you that she voted in the Republican primary, or did she encourage her supporters to do so? A. I would have to go and read her statement again, but it was very, very obvious to everybody that she was. Either that or she was incredibly hypocritical, which she's not. She's a pretty straight arrow. MR. GILMORE: Objection, hearsay. Before we go on. Q. (BY MR. ALLEN) So did she -- okay. We've probably taken that as far as we can. So where you're in a situation like this, where I'll represent to you that Idaho law does not include party representation, how do you tell the difference between Republicans voting in a primary and Independents? A. Well, I think that may be part of the
Page 39

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

MR. ALLEN: So I think we missed the answer to a question. Could you read the question back? COURT REPORTER: Yes. Would you please answer this one again: "What do you believe was the extent of crossover voting in your primary?" THE WITNESS: I guess I answered it fairly weakly, because I said it was extensive, and that doesn't clarify the extent very well. I guess I would point you to number 15, which is on the last page right before my signature. I lost to Joe by 936 votes. And if you look at the number of votes that were cast for Democratic candidates, they were minimal. Almost nobody voted in the Democratic primary, because the Democrats asked them not to. And if you look at the number of people who had voted for the Democratic candidate in the previous election, there were a lot more than 936 votes. And so if you just make some very logical and easy-to-make assumptions, which is that the Democrats did what their local leadership asked them to do and voted in the
Page 41

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

concern. What I'm concerned about is that I want to freely associate, in my society, with people of like mind, and I want to be able to form that association in a manner that best represents me and what I want to see accomplished in my society. And if we don't -- if we are not allowed, as free citizens, to set up some structure to that, so that I know who I'm associating with so that we can build our own -you know, our own platforms, and nominate our own candidates, and know who we are supporting and why, then I'm not being allowed to exercise my freedom as a citizen in a free country. Q. What do you believe was the extent of crossover voting in your primary? A. (Indecipherable.) Q. And what do you base that -COURT REPORTER: I didn't understand that answer. I'm sorry. THE WITNESS: -- just numbers of people who voted and -- and I'd have to go back, and I think I actually addressed that in part of my Affidavit, from some stuff that I had in my record.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Republican primary, because they didn't vote in the Democratic primary -- and that was evident, because there weren't any -- you know, very, very few votes were even cast for the Democratic -between the Democratic candidates -- then you have to assume that a large number, almost equal to or close to the number that voted in the previous general election, were Democrats, because they voted for Democrats in the previous election. I mean, there's some logic there to assuming that a large number of these people were Democrats, because they voted as Democrats. And there had to have been, in any stretch of anyone's logic, more than 936 Democrats voting in that primary for my opponent. Q. (BY MR. ALLEN) So let me -- I'll represent to you that I have, sitting in front of me, the election results from the 2002 and 2004 primary elections. And it is true, is it not, that in 2004 there was no Democrat running for Seat B, what you were running for? A. There weren't, not in Seat B. But there was in the other seat, and there had been in the election before that as well. 11 (Pages 38 to 41)

[phone]

M & M COURT REPORTING

[phone] (fax)

Page: 11
Number: 1 Author: csmith Objection to deposition question Subject: Sticky Note Date: 10/3/2010 4:43:26 PM Author: lwinmill Subject: Sticky Note Date: 10/11/2010 9:01:23 PM Overruled because there is no hearsay statement. Sustained with regard to reference that "it was very, very obvious to everyobdoy that she was. No foundation.

Page 54

Page 56

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A. Now, I want to clarify something you said, too, because I do have statistical evidence. I just don't have absolute evidence. I think if you do any type of statistical analysis, any type of research-based -- you know, any scientific analysis of that data, it would support my findings dramatically. But it's not absolute, because we don't know, for a fact, who the Republicans are and who the Democrats are. That's the only reason I can't say it absolutely. Q. So as we sit here today, are you personally convinced that the reason that you lost this election was that Democrats crossed over and voted? A. Yes; and I believe that I have strong evidence to support that belief. Q. Have you already told us the evidence that -- I don't want to go back through your conversation with Mr. Allen about the vote totals or whatever; I think you've made your point there. But do you have anything else that you would like to clarify as to what you believe is the statistical evidence that supports that position?
Page 55

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q.1 Okay. A. So that's my biggest piece of statistical evidence. Plus just knowing people in the communities, talking to people. So that's where my opinion comes from. Q. Very good. MR. ALLEN: I'm going to object that Mr. Adams has not been qualified as an expert to offer that opinion. MR. TROUPIS: Okay. Mr. Adams, that concludes the questions that I have for you. Thank you very much. I don't know whether Mr. Gilmore or Mr. Allen might have follow-up. MR. GILMORE: I just have a couple of brief follow-up. FURTHER EXAMINATION QUESTIONS BY MR. GILMORE: Q. This is Mr. Gilmore again. In our discussion, I haven't heard you mention Independents. Are you classifying everybody who's not a Republican as a Democrat, or are you allowing a middle ground of Independents who are neither Republicans nor Democrats? A. Well, I would say classifying someone
Page 57

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A. No, I think that -- that's really the statistical evidence, is that you have a fairly sizable number of Democrats or people who are voting for the Democratic candidate in a general election, and then you have this very small number who voted in the primary, and the next election cycle. And it would be my opinion that there are a lot more Democrats than vote in the Democratic primary, too, because -- for a lot of reasons. I mean, some of them just don't care which candidate makes it. Others don't think they have any chance, so they don't show up and vote. I mean, there's a lot of reasons for that. But if you have -- the easiest indicator of Democrat-versus-Republican separation in the community without registered voters, in one party or the other, if that's the case, is who voted for the Democrat and who voted for the Republican in the last general election. And if we use that statistical data and compare it to our primary, there's a huge disparity in the number of perceived Democrats in the general and the number of voting Democrats in the primary.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

as an Independent is up to them. I classify people as Republicans as people who want to associate with me to develop a platform and nominate candidates to office. I can't speak to people outside of that. Q. Well, I didn't phrase my question very well. Let me take another run at it. When you were discussing the statistical basis for your inferences of Democratic and Republican voting patterns in the primary versus the general election, are you assuming that all of the vote totals represent either Democrats or Republicans, or do those vote totals include Independents as well? A. No, I think there could be a significant percentage of Independents and my analysis would still hold true. Q. And there could be Independents voting for Republican candidates in the primary as well? A. Correct. MR. GILMORE: That's all I wanted to clarify. Any further? MR. ALLEN: No questions here. MR. GILMORE: Christ? MR. TROUPIS: None for me. And,
15 (Pages 54 to 57)

[phone]

M & M COURT REPORTING

[phone] (fax)

Page: 15
Number: 1 Author: csmith Subject: Sticky Note Intervenor-Defendants' objection to deposition Date: 10/3/2010 4:44:04 PM Author: lwinmill Subject: Sticky Note Date: 10/12/2010 6:47:02 AM Sustained. No expertise to offer a statistical analysis.