34 2. An issue of actual fraud is wholly unstained by evidence of mere irregularities unaccompanied by fraudulent intent, or by proof of fraudulent intent without action to carry such intent into force. 26 Am Jur 2d, Elections Section 342; 3. Fraud includes the intentional employment of trick, deception of artifice designed to cheat or mislead another. Kontar v. Mouwaffak, 17 LLR 446; Monrovia Construction Company v. Wazami, 23 LLR 58; 4. It is not sufficient to merely allege fraud as a basis for relieve, it must be established by proof. Massaquoi v. Massaquoi, 35LLR 508; 5. The law forbids the proving of fraud by testimony of witnesses based on presumptions, hypothesis and deductions. Intrusco Corporation Osseily, 32 LLR 558. 6. An election will not be invalidated by irregularities unless the irregularities materially affected the result of the election. Andrew v. Blackman, Supreme of the State of Louisiana, 59, 50 769. Based on the evidence adduced orally, documentarily and demonstratively, the Hearing Officer has determined that the below single issue is determinative of the controversies raised in this complaint. ISSUE: Has the Complainants provided evidence sufficient to prove irregularities and fraud to warrant the re-run of the October 10, 2017 election? The Complainants, all of whom participated in the October 10, 2017 election have raised several issues in their separate complaints that the elections were marked by irregularities and fraud, therefore the entire elections must be rerun. The first Complainant and the Intervenor are alleging that the Final Registration Roll used during the elections was not published according to Statute, and also that said document was altered by addition made to it during the elections. The first Complainant and the Intervenors also alleged that the ballot papers used during the elections had no serial number and that the Defendant had done so with the intent to cheat. The first Complainants and the Intervenors alleged further that on the day of voting several polling places opened late and that voting materials taken to some polling places were unaccompanied by security officer. Both the first Complainant and the Intervenors informed the Hearing Officer that ballot papers were discovered in Glay Town, Grand Gedeh County. The Intervenor/ Complainants have presented through a demonstration by one of it witnesses on two flash drives containing the Final Registration Roll that there were a total of 79 polling places missing across 10 precincts, and the missing polling places amounts to 35,267 registered voters. The first Complainant alleged that at Tokpa Polu Public School polling place #1, the Defendant gave candidate of the CDC total of 1109 votes far exceeding the total of registered voters at that center. In rebutting the testimonies of the first Complainants and the Intervenor/Complainant's witnesses, the Defendant first witness, C. A. Lamin Lighe presented that the ballot papers used during election had serial numbers on the stub of the ballot papers. The witness testified to and presented both the Presidential and Representative ballot papers having serial number on the ballot stub, these instrument were marked and admitted into evidence. The Defendant witness provided that contrary to the Complainant claim that the final registration roll was not published, the roll was indeed published and made available at all of its local offices for inspection by the public. That one