Chapter 4 • • • An anti-fraud statute usually will not invalidate ballots that are cast in a way that does not expose them to the fraudulent activity. o to protect the secrecy of the elections, o to discourage bribery, fraud and corruption, and o to protect the integrity of the ballot by preventing vote buying schemes. • • State statutes commonly invalidate ballots with identifying marks. • • • • o not fraudulent, and o clearly shows the voter’s intention to vote for one candidate. Election officials are required to initial ballots to prevent people from stuffing the ballot box by secretly putting into the ballot box additional ballots they brought with them into the polling place. Identifying marks on the ballot are prohibited (and ballots with such marks are invalidated): An unusual mark on a ballot is not evidence of fraud unless there is a deliberate intent to place an identifying mark on the ballot. A nonconforming mark for a candidate usually will be count ed if it is: However, a nonconforming mark on a ballot will be rejected in states where marking directions are strictly construed. Fraud in the certification of petitions for candidate nominations destroys the safeguards for the petition process, and courts will void individual signatures determined to be fraudulent. Where a petition is permeated with fraud, the court will void the entire petition. Criminal behavior that does not change the election results (by changing the vote totals or making the election result impossible to determine) will not void an election. Such behavior would, however, be subject to prosecution in a separate proceeding. 101