New Judge Selected For Maricopa Audit Proceedings After Recusal of Previous Judge Less Than 24 Hours Before Hearing

A Superior Court of Arizona in Maricopa County judge presiding over the 2020 presidential election audit, Judge Christopher Coury, withdrew less than 24 hours before a scheduled hearing at 11 a.m. this morning.

The hearing was scheduled “to review audit’s rules and procedures” and was expected to take place due to a lawsuit filed by the Arizona Democratic party.

Judge Daniel Martin, who has been a judge in the Superior Court since 2007 and presided over cases in family, criminal, juvenile and civil courts, was appointed to take over all proceedings in the court case revolving around the election audit.

The superior court also announced that all hearings previously set by Coury are canceled and each side of the case will have 10 days to tell the new judge how they think the case should be handled.

Coury’s recusal came after he apparently received new documents from attorneys defending Cyber Ninja’s, the company that was hired by Arizona Senate Republicans to conduct the audit.

In an email to attorneys representing all parties in the case, Coury said, “In the documents filed today, several attorneys appeared whose names previously were not on notices of appearance prior to Friday’s hearing. That is not surprising, given the short fuse in which the hearings have proceeded. The involvement of one attorney whose name appeared on the filings for the first time today requires me to recuse.”

Chair of the Arizona Republican Party, Dr. Kelli Ward blamed Democrats for the recusal in a Twitter video, calling the decision to recuse “a little weak.”

The Maricopa County Forensic Audit continues as the legal drama continues to unfold. Watch the latest recap and news from Arizona Chairwoman @kelliwardaz. We Will Not Be Intimidated #ElectionIntegrity #AzAudit pic.twitter.com/GVj6Ct7Okd

— Arizona Republican Party (@AZGOP) April 26, 2021

A Twitter handle has been setup for the audit as well and recently, a tweet was published regarding the ballot count that said, “To correct just two of the numerous errors in the @nytimes article earlier today; there were 46 pallets of ballots, not 78, and all trucks were box vans – not flatbeds.”

To correct just two of the numerous errors in the @nytimes article earlier today; there were 46 pallets of ballots, not 78, and all trucks were box vans – not flatbeds.

— Maricopa Arizona Audit (@ArizonaAudit) April 26, 2021