The Thing Speaks For Itself
I got a phone call last week from a retired lawyer, someone I’ve known virtually my entire life. He wondered why, in the discussion of voter fraud, we haven’t heard a certain phrase we learned in law school–res ipsa loquitor, which is Latin for “the thing speaks for itself”.
He’s absolutely right, especially as the Trump campaign prepares to file new lawsuits.
Res ipsa is a legal principle allowing those suing to meet their burden of proof with essentially circumstantial evidence. This is normally used in tort law, alleging one person committed a harm against another…but it seems to work here.
To prove res ipsa loquitor, you must establish that the incident in question was of a type that does not generally happen without negligence or deliberate action by another. Then, that it was caused by an action solely within the defendant’s control. Finally, that the person suing did not contribute to the harm, and there are no other plausible explanations.
If those elements are shown, then enough proof has been offered to require the defendant to rebut the allegations.
Voting patterns and control over voting machines and counting ballots would seem to make the case here.
For example, here are statistics of the Biden lead in absentee votes in a half-dozen states in the center of the country and the election: Iowa, 16%; Ohio, 16%, Indiana, 14%; Illinois, 25%…but then Michigan 38% and Pennsylvania, 58%. Statistically plausible?
Similarly, the number of ballots in multiple states where the voter only cast a ballot for president and nothing down ticket–and the thousands of such ballots all were for Biden.
So to all those who say, “where’s the evidence”…I suggest responding with res ipsa loquitor–the thing speaks for itself.
