I’m not surprised or disappointed by the action by Team Brannon to seek a new trial, as a precursor to a likely Idaho Supreme Court appeal of Judge Charles Hosack’s rejection of Jim Brannon’s election challenge. However, I do wonder what is Team Brannon’s goal at this point. With the Legislature even more in GOP hands and with sympathetic Kathy Sims soon to  representing the city of Coeur d’Alene in the Legislature, Team Brannon could easily have worked with Sims to introduce legislation to tweak Idaho election law. Or Brannon simply could have thrown his hat into the ring again. After all, we’re 2 or 3 months from the beginning of the 2011 municipal election cycle. Why pursue an appeal that you’ll probably lose — and will cost you more money — if you have less expensive remedies elsewhere? Does Brannon view himself as some sort of martyr? Is this an effort to keep the 2009 City Council election in play, to tarnish the incumbents, as seemed to have been the purpose in the county clerk’s election this fall? Does Starr Kelso have some itch he needs to scratch by taking another case to the Idaho Supreme Court? Inquiring minds want to know — DFO.

In a move that’s likely a precursor to appealing the adverse ruling in Jim Brannon’s election challenge, attorney Starr Kelso has filed a motion for a new trial with Judge Charles Hosack. If I read the tea leaves correctly, the motion is a precursor for an appeal of Hosack’s decision naming incumbent Mike Kennedy as winner of the 2009 City Council seat against Brannon by 3 votes. You can read the long list of postings in this case with the Idaho State Judiciary here.

Question: Are you surprised that Brannon & Kelso are going ahead with this challenge?

Judge Charles Hosack has signed his decision against plaintiff Jim Brannon in Brannon’s challenge to the 2009 municipal election in which he lost to incumbent Mike Kennedy by 3 votes. Hosack signed the order for his ruling for Kennedy Thursday. Which means that Brannon now has 10 working days to file an appeal, a date estimated by Kennedy’s attorney Scott Reed to be Nov. 15. During the trial that lasted from Sept 13-18, Hosack disallowed 3 Kennedy votes and 1 Brannon vote to reduce the margin of victory for Kennedy from 5 on election night to the final margin of 3. Hosack decision here.

Question: Do you think Brannon will appeal Hosack’s decision to the Idaho Supreme Court?

RE: Contempt charge dropped: McCrory, attorney ask judge not to dismiss suit/Tom Hasslinger, CdA Press

At OpenCDA.com, Mary Souza can barely contain herself re: the grave injustice suffered by her sidekick, Bill McCrory, Tuesday afternoon. Seems she’s in a huff that Judge Charles Hosack simply dismissed contempt of court charges against Bill when she was planning to make a reappearance in his courtroom. Well, there’s a bit more. By dismissing the charges as he did, the judge blocked “the evidence compiled at great effort and cost by Bill’s attorney and the witnesses they arranged to testify.” Mary conjectures that Hosack did not want to hear ” … why the charges were not grounded in law and why the complaint was frivolous.  The judge did not want to assign fees.” Seems Mary, who admits she’s holding herself back, sees a great wrong in all of this — McCrory being forced to pay beaucoup bucks for an action she blames on Mike Kennedy and “close supporter and HBO commenter Christa Hazel.” But she continues to say nothing of the approximate $60,000 that Mike Kennedy has to pay simply by having the misfortune of beating sour-grapes challenger Jim Brannon. Amazing. Mary’s comment here.

Question: Shouldn’t Mary be happy that the contempt charges against McCrory were dismissed?

Item: Brannon suit goes to the judge: Hosack says it could take him 1-2 weeks to decide fate of Kennedy’s city council seat/Tom Hasslinger, Coeur d’Alene Press

More Info: im Brannon wants a new election for Seat 2 on the Coeur d’Alene City Council. If one isn’t ordered, the incumbent, Mike Kennedy, has enough votes to secure the narrow victory no matter which way evidence on three more illegal voters is ruled. Kennedy won the Nov. 3 election by five votes. But 1st District Judge Charles Hosack must decide whether some irregularities during Coeur d’Alene’s Nov. 3 general election warrant a one-on-one runoff for the city council seat.

Question: Do you see any value to the long, judicial exercise involved in Jim Brannon’s challenge to his 5-vote loss to incumbent Mike Kennedy?

A Berry Picker files this report from the Brannon Trial front lines: “I sat in for about an hour at the trial.  It is painful to sit thru.  Starr Kelso is throwing darts to see what sticks when this should have been done during the preparation process.  At one point, he presented Susan Smith with paper work for her to review and answer to.  It took Judge Hosack some time to figure out what and where Kelso was directing testimony.  Kelso suggested that Susan Smith could go line by line of absentee voters in the spreadsheet he presented, Hosack responded “NO, we will not be doing that.”  Judge Hosack also stated that he has never seen an attorney try to present evidence during trial in this manner.  Judge Hosack stated a few times that he failed to see the relevance and once was confused as to the point of Barry McHugh’s testimony regarding a chain of emails. Starr Kelso has a nervous tick:  He sucks air through the corner of his mouth and teeth.  It is loud and he does this often.  I counted 12 sucks in one minute.  There were other minutes where I lost count.  

• Related: CoeurGenX: Kelso wasted my time/Huckleberries Online
  

In the Coeur d’Alene Press, reporter Tom Hasslinger reports today: “The trial is scheduled to run through Thursday, but many witnesses have yet to be called. They have showed up to testify, but have left their phone numbers with counsel to be contacted when they’re needed and left before the day concluded. ‘We’re two days into the trial,’ said 1st District Judge Charles Hosack at the end of the daylong hearing. ‘I’m beginning to get concerned about the pace.’” Full story here.

Question: Why do you think Hosack’s allowing Starr Kelso to continue at a snail’s pace?

The trial began with fireworks as Kelso attempted to disqualify Kootenai County First District Judge Charles Hosack due to statements the judge made ruling on a related matter. In that ruling, Hosack apparently used the word “anathema,” which Kelso said he had to look up. Kelso said the use of that word must have taken some thought and showed Hosack felt “that this election contest is vile.” “You cannot proceed,” Kelso said to the judge. “You have shown your personal bias.” Hosack, however, dismissed that motion and remained as judge, saying Kelso, who was not present at the prior hearing, had missed the context of the discussion. Lastly, he added, “I can guarantee Mr. Kelso it didn’t take me any research to come up with the word ‘anathema’”’/Alison Boggs, SR. More here.

Question: Do you know what the word, “anathema” means without looking it up in the dictionary?

Hosack said the case has a lot to prove to identify and overturn five votes that were illegally cast for Kennedy. The judge weighed nearly two hours of testimony from both counsels in support and against the hundreds of pages worth of affidavits and reports now filling multiple files in courthouse records regarding the civil suit that’s in its 10th month. While some of those filings don’t amount yet to fact in the court’s view, the case has come too far now to cut it off, the judge ruled. “If it were a trial, I have not been convinced,” Hosack said. “But this isn’t a trial”/Tom Hasslinger, Coeur d’Alene Press. More here. (SR file photo of Judge Charles Hosack by Kathy Plonka)

Question: What do you make of the statement by Judge Charles Hosack: ‘If it were a trial, I have not been convinced’?

Strangely, Bill McCrory, who is quick to point the finger at others from his keyboard commando spot in the OpenCDA.com swamp, has yet to mutter a word re: his appearance in Judge Charles Hosack’s 1st District Courtroom (re: a contempt of court allegation) on Wednesday. In fact, nothing has been written out front at OpenSewer.com in the last two days (although I haven’t taken time to read the comments). Has the cat got McCrory’s tongue? Or is he being a little more cautious after donning suit-and-tie to face the possible legal music (at a trial scheduled for mid-September) ? Inquiring minds want to know.

Item: Contempt charge on hold: Judge wants to wait until election challenge is decided/Tom Hasslinger, Coeur d’Alene Press

More Info: McCrory pleaded not guilty to the contempt charges on Tuesday. That trial has been scheduled for 9 a.m. Friday, Sept. 17, a day after the election suit is scheduled to wrap up. If he’s found guilty on the two accusations, he could face up to $10,000 in civil fines.

Reaction?

Update: McCrory denied that he was in contempt of court, at the hearing this afternoon. Now, Judge Charles Hosack will set a date in September to hear the case.

A contempt of court hearing involving Bill McCrory, a supporter in Jim Brannon’s long-running suit to overturn the 2009 Coeur d’Alene City Council election results, is scheduled for 3 o’clock this afternoon in 1st District Judge Charles Hosack’s courtroom. Scott Reed, the attorney for Councilman Mike Kennedy, wants McCrory held in contempt of court for allegedly violating a confidentiality agreement in the case. According to an Aug. 13 Coeur d’Alene Press story, Reed complained that voter information pertaining to the recently-reviewed absentee envelopes wasn’t supposed to be shared outside the courtroom and Bill McCrory violated that privacy agreement. Stay tuned.

• You can read Scott Reed’s contempt motion against Bill McCrory here
• You can read Scott Reed’s brief asking for summary judgment in this case here
  

Question: How do you think this’ll play out?

• Update: Dan of the County reports: “(The Brannon case is) now set for trial the week of September 13th.”

At 3:30 p.m. today, Judge Charles Hosack will hear five motions in the long-running attempt by challenger Jim Brannon to overthrow the Coeur d’Alene City Council election results. Brannon has asked Hosack to reconsider the ruling he made May 14 that Brannon hasn’t made a claim that’s sufficient to overturn the results in his five-vote loss to Councilman Mike Kennedy or the three other races on the municipal ballot last November. Also, the judge is being asked to rule on the request to intervene in the lawsuit by Bill McCrory and his wife. Also, Attorney Scott Reed, who represents Kennedy, and Mike Haman, who represents the city of Coeur d’Alene, have asked the judge to set a date for the trial.

Question: Am I being a bit cynical when I consider that a Sept. 13 trial will push this case into the heart of the next election cycle, possibly benefitting some of the individuals running for various local offices?