Talk of the day: NASA cites constituencies with vote discrepancies

NASA cannot go on a fishing expedition for discrepancies here and there, hoping to excite and persuade the judges. It has to find discrepancies on such a massively organised scale, amounting to premeditated fraud, as to wipe out Uhuru's 1.4 million vote advantage. Also, if their agents were chased away in Central and Rift Valley regions, why is this allegation only coming out now? Did they report to IEBC and the police immediately? All polling stations had policemen stationed there. Where is proof of this allegation? Where is proof of the computer algorithm? Where is proof of hacked IEBC servers using the late Chris Msando's password? Where is the affidavit of the IEBC insider who gave NASA screenshots showing Raila Odinga had 8.2 million votes and Uhuru 7.1 million votes as Mudavadi told us? I am disappointed with NASA. We expected more than this. The NASA lawyers have failed Baba miserably. Mista Timba

If the petitioner focuses on truncation errors such as 467 versus 461 while looking for 1.4 million votes, they will lose the mark. The game plan should be to look for systematic errors that confirm that there was a bias towards Uhuru. In any data management process, there will be errors and omissions but as long as they are not systematic, they will even out. Daniel Kariuki, Nairobi

It is the duty of the petitioner to serve the respondents with the filed petition. The respondents have no duty to collect the documents. The respondent should then file the requisite documents and serve the petitioner