BREAKING: Forensic Experts Suggest Mathematical “Red Flags” In First Round of Brazilian Presidential Election, Cites Benford’s Law

Original article.
by Matt Tyrmand, October 30, 2022, 43,059

Image by Marcelo Camargo/Agência Brasil

Please Follow us on GabMindsTelegramRumbleGab TVGETTRTruth Social 

This dossier was provided to us by a credible expert source and was created by a small group of technical experts in the fields of mathematics, political science, and forensic analysis, all who are well versed in election statistics and electoral anomalies.

The source provided this document and demonstrated the credibility of the authors who are presenting here their statistical findings on the first round of the Brazilian elections (held Sunday October 2nd).

The source group applied Benford’s Law, a highly recognized statistical formula, to analyze publicly available data provided by the Brazilian Electoral Court (TSE). The formula showed inconsistencies in voting tabulation in several regions across the country.

The links to the TSE’s publicly available data is in the document, and other experts are invited to conduct the same Benford’s Law test on the data. The voting tabulation graphs are also available — showing the region, the candidate, and the digit analyzed. Several charts show Benford’s Law curve in a certain format, while the actual curve of the vote tabulation veers completely off from it. This is what points to manipulation according to the expert source.

Benford’s Law never definitively proves fraud in and of itself. It is a methodology that is used to detect anomalies in large datasets, and thus help an auditor focus his audit on the clusters of data that present the anomalies. It serves as a “red flag” that, according to our source, should catalyze an audit review of the data in a system where auditors operate in good faith.

According to the source: the data patterns outlined in the dossier contain many strong anomalies that are glaring red flags. This is especially the case in the northeastern region of the country.

The curves and graphs in these compiled chart patterns present similarities to questionable elections in Iran and Venezuela in the past. This also greatly alarmed the expert source team.

We recommend that people read the document themselves and draw their own conclusions.

It is important to highlight that people in Brazil are unable to report news on such matters due to fears of Court persecution. As both Fox News and the New York Times have recently reported, there is clear indication that the Supreme and Electoral Courts are biased and will clamp down on anyone who investigates election integrity in Brazil or journalists reporting information that might be construed as calling into question the integrity of the election systems or the court’s own enforcement actions.

According to our source, the Brazilian central electoral body insists on obfuscating the transparency of the electoral process, which should be crystal clear and open to all forms of visibility and provides for an open and public count that allows for a subsequent physical audit. That any experts from the sciences have to publish this document without attribution for fear of running afoul of the Brazilian federal courts politically motivated meting out of “justice” and their Praetorian guard police force’s unconstitutional enforcement activity at the court’s behest, is a great tragedy for contemporary Brazil.

Needless to say, the threat to democracy in the stifling of open debate, especially on controversial issues, such as electoral mechanisms and systems, is manifestly clear.

N.b. This report has been released for distribution after the second round polls closed so as not to interfere with the electoral decision making of any Brazilian citizen voters.


** End **