PART II DAVISON GOES TO COURT

KEN DAVISON VOTED IN THE COUNCIL OF ELDERS ELECTION THAT WAS COUNTED ON AUGUST 31, 2008. INSTEAD OF VOTING FOR FOUR CANDIDATES LIKE THE ELECTION LAW REQUIRED HIM TO DO, HE VOTED FOR THREE CANDIDATES. HE BELIEVED HIS BALLOT WAS LEGAL BY HIS INTERPRETATION OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE MOHEGAN TRIBE.

DAVISON VOTED FOR THREE CANDIDATES AND NOT THE FOUR REQUIRED UNDER THE ELECTION ORDINANCE AS IT RELATES TO THE AUGUST 31st ELECTION. DAVISON FEELS THAT ORDINANCE VIOLATES THE CONSTITUTION. "I CAN'T IMAGINE THAT THE INTENT OF THE CONSTITUTION IS TO FORCE TRIBAL MEMBERS TO VOTE FOR CANDIDATES THEY DON'T WANT TO VOTE FOR BUT THE ELECTION CODE (ORDINANCE) MANDATES JUST THAT IN ITS CURRENT FORM," ACCORDING TO HIS COMPLAINT.

ON THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 11, 2008, THE ELECTION COMMITTEE GAVE DAVISON A FINAL RULING THAT SAID HIS BALLOT WAS NOT VALID, IN OTHER WORDS "SPOILED." HIS NEXT STEP, THE LETTER SAID, WAS TO GO TO COURT.

ON FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 2008, MR. DAVISON ATTEMPTED TO PETITION THE COUNCIL OF ELDERS (SUPREME COURT.) NO ONE WAS THERE TO ACCEPT THE PETITION. THE REASON MR. DAVISON WENT TO SUPREME COURT WAS BECAUSE HE FELT THAT 1) THE ELECTION ORDINANCE VIOLATES THE MOHEGAN CONSTITUTION, 2) HE WANTED A INTERPRETATION OF THE CONSTITUTION 3) HE WANTED EITHER THE LAW CHANGED OR 4) AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION IF NEEDED. IT SEEMS TO ME, HE BELIEVES THAT THE LOWER COURTS CANNOT MAKE THE CONSTITUTIONAL INTERPRETATION THAT IS THE KEY TO THIS CASE.

THEN ON MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 15, 2008, THE COUNCIL OF ELDERS REVIEWED THE FACTS AND ADVISED MR. DAVISON THAT THEY WOULD NOT HEAR THE CASE AT THIS TIME AND HE SHOULD TAKE THE MATTER TO THE MOHEGAN TRIBAL COURT.

THAT AFTERNOON (MONDAY) DAVISON FILED THE NECESSARY PAPER WORK WITH THE MOHEGAN TRIBAL GOVERNMENT.

THE NEXT DAY, TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 16, 2008, THE TRIBAL COUNCIL, THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT, AND CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER WERE ALL SERVED WITH A SUMMONS.

THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 2008, AROUND 3:30 P.M. A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ELECTION COMMITTEE WAS SERVED.

ACCORDING TO COURT RULES, THE ELECTION COMMITTEE HAS I BELIEVE 30 DAYS TO RESPOND.

I WILL ENDEAVOR TO KEEP YOU POSTED ON THE PROGRESS OF THIS CASE.