DAVISON'S CASE IS TO BE SCHEDULED FOR TRIAL DATE

MOHEGAN TRIBAL MEETING ROOM, OCTOBER 3, 2008 AT 9:00 A.M., THE MATTER BEFORE THE MOHEGAN TRIBAL COURT WAS KENNETH DAVISON VS. THE MOHEGAN ELECTION COMMITTEE. PRESIDING WAS JUDGE JANE FREEMAN. FOR THE DEFENDANT (THE ELECTION COMMITTEE) WAS ANDREW HOULDING. FOR THE PLAINTIFF WAS KEN DAVISON ACTING AS HIS OWN LEGAL COUNCIL (PRO SE).

JUDGE FREEMAN EXPLAINED TO KEN DAVISON HOW SHE INTENDED TO CONDUCT THE HEARING. THE JUDGE EXPLAINED THAT SHE WAS GOING TO HEAR ARGUMENTS AND IF MR. DAVISON WENT INTO TESTIMONY HE WOULD BE SWORN IN. SHE WOULD FIRST CONSIDER THE MOTION BY THE LAWYER FOR THE ELECTION COMMITTEE'S MOTION FOR DISMISSAL. THEN IF IT WAS RULED THAT THE CASE SHOULD PROCEED, SHE WOULD HEAR THE FACTS ABOUT THE INJUNCTION THAT KEN DAVISON WANTED.

MR. HOULDING SAID THAT THE VOTE COUNT WOULD NOT HAVE CHANGED EVEN IF MR. DAVISON VOTE HAD BEEN COUNTED. THE LAWYER SAID THAT IT WAS MOOT BECAUSE IT WOULD NOT HAVE CHANGED ANYTHING. THE LAWYER PUT INTO EVIDENCE, EXHIBIT A, THE 3 PAGE ELECTION RESULTS ISSUED BY JIM GRAY OF THE ELECTION COMMITTEE. I BELIEVE THE JUDGE SAW THAT THIS COULD BE OR HAS ALREADY BECOME A PROBLEM.

EVEN THOUGH IT SEEMS KEN DAVISON DID NOT DO THE PAPER WORK PROPERLY, THE JUDGE SAID THAT IN HIS COMPLAINT, DAVISON ALSO WANTED TO KNOW ABOUT THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE LAW. MR. HOULDING SAID THAT THIS WAS A MATTER OF LEGISLATION AND THAT THE TRIBAL COUNCIL SHOULD TAKE CARE OF IT. MR. DAVISON SAID IN RESPONSE THAT HE HAD THE TRIBAL CHAIRMAN, THE HEAD OF THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT FOR THE MOHEGAN TRIBE, THE CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER, AND THE ELECTION COMMITTEE, ALL SERVED. THE JUDGE I BELIEVE STATED THAT ELECTION COMMITTEE CAN'T DO SECTION 201-7 OF THE LAW AND ORDER CODE. IT SEEMS JUDGE FREEMAN FELT THAT BECAUSE KEN DAVISON WAS ACTING PRO SE, WANTED TO KNOW THE VALIDITY OF HIS BALLOT BASED ON THE CONSTITUTION. AFTER MR. HOULDING TALKED AGAIN ABOUT THE ELECTION OUTCOME MR. DAVISON SAID IF THE CASE CONTINUES HE INTENDS TO HIRE AN ATTORNEY. MR. DAVISON STATED THIS WAS THE SECOND TIME THAT HE HAD VOTED FOR LESS THEN THE REQUIRED NUMBER AND HIS BALLOT WAS NOT COUNTED. THE LAST TIME HE WAS OUT OF THE COUNTRY AND DID NOT PURSUE THE MATTER. I BELIEVE THE JUDGE ASKED, ON THE MATTER OF ELECTION CODE VIOLATES THE CONSTITUTION FREEDOM OF CHOICE, IN OTHER WORDS BEING FORCED TO VOTE TO HAVE VOTE COUNTED.

THE JUDGE, I BELIEVE TOLD MR. HOULDING THAT THERE WERE THREE EXCEPTIONS TO THE PART ABOUT THE "MOOT" CLAUSE. THE THREE EXCEPTIONS WERE: 1) SPEED BY THE ELECTION PROCESS, NOT ALLOWING ENOUGH TIME TO BE REVERSED, 2) THE LIKELY POSSIBILITY THAT THIS COULD HAPPEN AGAIN, AND 3) FOR GOOD OF THE PUBLIC OR THE PEOPLE) PROTECTION OF THIS HAPPENING.

AFTER HEARING THESE AND OTHER ARGUMENTS, THE JUDGE RULED THAT SHE WOULD INDEED HEAR THE CASE. I BELIEVE SHE USED THE THIRD EXCEPTION TO THE "MOOT" CLAUSE IN HER DECISION. AT THAT POINT , KEN DAVISON SAID HE WAS WITHDRAWING HIS REQUEST FOR INJUNCTION. MR. HOULDING AGREED THAT THE INJUNCTION SHOULD BE WITHDRAWN.

THE JUDGE SAID SHE WOULD SCHEDULE THE TRIAL DATE. SEVERAL MEMBERS OF THE ELECTION COMMITTEE SAID, THEY WERE HAPPY THIS WAS GOING TO TRIAL BECAUSE THEY WANT THIS DECIDED, TOO. IT WAS A GOOD DAY FOR THE MOHEGAN PEOPLE.