Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai, M.I.T. Ph.D., the Inventor of Email has commented on the Maricopa County Supervisor’s explanation about the envelopes for mail-in voting. The answer is very shady, just like the Supervisors themselves. He wants to know why some of the envelopes look like they were photoshopped. It appears like the “Verified & Approved” looks like it was photoshopped before sending them to the audit team.
Here is an example of one envelope image that may be fake:
VIDEO OF THE DAYIdiots Twerk On Ambulance After Shooting In Oakland, CA
Apparently, the county compressed the images of the ballots instead of sending uncompressed images of the original envelopes. What are they hiding? This is why auditors need the originals because images can be doctored. They can doctor the originals, but they would be too easy to debunk them. Shiva describes the explanation as “somewhat cryptic” This caused him for more answers:
Dr. Shiva’s response to Maricopa County’s explanation to the envelopes. pic.twitter.com/1rlsmLZeCU
— Christina Bobb (@christina_bobb) October 2, 2021
Dr. Shiva’s letter to Randy Pullen:
Arizona State Senate c/o Randy Pullen
Re: Response to County Explanation of Stamp “Behind” Envelope Triangle
Thank you for sharing with me the “County Explanation” concerning the anomaly EchoMail detected of the “VERIFIED & APPROVED MCTEC” stamp appearing “behind” the triangle. Their explanation stated:
“Since the scan is compressed the envelope only takes the outline of things like an arrow or large font. So the stamp was simply stamped over The Black arrow and in a scan it appears to be under it.”
This explanation is somewhat cryptic, and our follow up herein is, therefore, based on our interpretation of their explanation (see I). Moreover, their explanation raises many new questions, and provides an opportunity for further dialog with the County to understand the specific Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) of the image processing methods and what steps they follow in the systems for Early Voting Ballot (EVB) return envelope processing.
I. EchoMail’s Interpretation of County Explanation
EchoMail’s interpretation of the County’s explanation is: When a stamp is placed over a blackened region, on any of the triangles on the EVB return envelope (as shown in Figure 1), image compression replaces non-white pixels in those triangle areas with white pixels. And, this image compression process leads to the observed anomaly.
II. Questions and Concerns in Response to County’s Explanation
1) What is most concerning is to find out now, for the first time since EchoMail was engaged for this audit, that the images EchoMail received are a compressed version of some original version. This means that modifications took place e.g. compression on the original images that were created from scanning of the voter’s original EVB return envelopes.
2) Are the pre-compression EVB return envelope images available?
3) How many sets of EVB return envelope images with varying compression exist?
4) Is there an entire set of EVB return envelope images that are high resolution?
5) Are the original EVB return envelopes available for inspection?
6) Is a virtual i.e. digital “VERIFIED & APPROVED MCTEC” stamp being applied to the original high-resolution EVB return envelope images?
7) Are the EVB return envelope images encrypted when saved?
8) What other image processing and modifications takes place on the original EVB return envelope image?
9) Are the EVB return envelope images stored in one central repository?
10)Who has access to the EVB return envelope images?