The Resolution of Election Disputes: Legal Principles that Control Election Challenges At 692. Levi Waller admitted to buying votes at the Fountain Run Precinct. Bo Tooley also bought votes at the Fountain Run Precinct, although he did not admit to it. Mr. Waller went to the bank on election day and got a supply of $5 bills. Witnesses saw both men bribing voters. One voter said that Mr. Tooley gave her $10 to vote his way. Both men were supporting Ms. Curtis.75 The court described further worrisome facts, saying, There was other evidence offered to indicate that something was amiss at Fountain Run: (1) Mrs. Curtis received only 12 votes in the Fountain Run precinct in a prior election where she did not have Waller’s support; (2) Mrs. Jernigan had significant ties to the Fountain Run area; Mrs. Curtis did not. However, Mrs. Curtis won the precinct by a 3-1 margin; (3) Things were normally pretty “loose” in Fountain Run. The city clerk testified that 80% of the voters were “floaters” or votes for sale. At 693. The court of appeals reviewed Kentucky law that said (1) a precinct’s votes could be thrown out when irregularities were “of such magnitude as effectively to destroy any hope that the results…were a fair indication of the sense of the voters…” and (2) that if the votes of a precinct that comprises less than 20% of the total vote were thrown out, then the election should be decided on the basis of the remaining votes in the election. The court noted that in order to throw out the results of an election (the first step in the preceding paragraph), The proof must be of such flagrant, extensive, and corrupt violations as to destroy the fairness and equality of the election. It is the opinion of this Court that there was overwhelming evidence of dereliction of duty on the part of the precinct officers, such that it appears that the officers made little if any effort to properly perform their function. There was evidence of an extensive amount of open voting in that husbands and wives were permitted to enter the poll together and that voters were improperly and illegally assisted in casting their votes. That there was evidence of bribery of voters on a determined and significant significant scale. [sic] This combination of factors compels a finding that the election in Fountain Run was so tainted with fraud that the result must be discarded and the election determined on the basis of remaining votes. At 693 (internal citation omitted) (emphasis supplied). 75 The court of appeals’ decision recites more evidence of the vote-buying scheme and makes for informative and entertaining reading. 88