Crystal Mason attempted to cast a provisional ballot in the presidential election while on supervised release for a federal conspiracy charge.
She was found guilty of illegal voting and sentenced to five years in prison. However, after an appeal by her legal team, the Texas appeals court reversed its earlier opinion that had upheld Mason's conviction and acquitted her of the charges.
In 2016, Crystal Mason attempted to cast a provisional ballot in the presidential election while on supervised release for a federal conspiracy charge. She was found guilty of illegal voting and sentenced to five years in prison. However, after an appeal by her legal team, the Texas appeals court reversed its earlier opinion that had upheld Mason's conviction and acquitted her of the charges.
Crystal Mason was found guilty of illegally casting a provisional ballot in the 2016 election.
Ms. Mason had been on probation after serving a five-year sentence for federal conspiracy charge and claimed she did not know she was ineligible to vote.
The Texas appeals court reversed its earlier opinion that had upheld Ms. Mason's conviction, acquitting her of the charges.
Accuracy
Mason claims she did not know she wasn't eligible to vote and the appeals court ruled that there was not enough evidence to convict her.
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the title of the article suggests that Crystal Mason has been acquitted when she was actually found guilty and sentenced to five years in prison for illegally casting a provisional ballot. Secondly, the author claims that Ms. Mason had acted on the advice of a poll worker who said she could cast her vote, but this is not supported by any evidence presented in court or mentioned in the article. Thirdly, there are no sources disclosed in the article to verify its accuracy.
The title of the article suggests that Crystal Mason has been acquitted when she was actually found guilty and sentenced to five years in prison for illegally casting a provisional ballot.
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains an appeal to authority fallacy by stating that the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals reversed its earlier opinion. The author also uses inflammatory rhetoric when describing Crystal Mason's situation as a 'case that has prompted outrage from voting-rights activists for years'. Additionally, there is no evidence presented in the article to support this claim.
The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals reversed its earlier opinion
Crystal Mason said in a statement on Thursday after her acquittal. Credit...Nitashia Johnson for The New York Times
Bias
(85%)
The author of the article is Orlando Mayorquín and he has a history of bias against voting rights activists. The title mentions that Crystal Mason was acquitted which implies that she was guilty in the first place. This statement could be seen as biased towards those who believe in stricter voter laws, even if it's not explicitly stated by the author.
The article uses language such as 'illegally casting a provisional ballot', which implies that Crystal Mason did something wrong and could be seen as biased towards those who believe in stricter voter laws.
Crystal Mason was convicted of voter fraud in 2018 for casting a provisional ballot while on probation for a federal tax conviction.
Mason claims she did not know she wasn't eligible to vote and the appeals court ruled that there was not enough evidence to convict her.
Accuracy
No Contradictions at Time
Of
Publication
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author states that Crystal Mason was convicted of voter fraud but fails to mention that she appealed her conviction and it has been overturned by a higher court. Secondly, the author quotes Justice Wade Birdwell stating that there was not enough evidence to convict Mason for knowing she wasn't eligible to vote while on supervised release from a federal tax conviction. However, this contradicts the fact that Mason read and signed an affidavit with her provisional ballot saying she had fully completed her sentence. This suggests that Birdwell may have been misinformed or selectively reporting information in order to support his argument for overturning the conviction.
The article states Crystal Mason was convicted of voter fraud but fails to mention that her conviction has been appealed and overturned by a higher court. This is an example of deceptive omission.
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains an appeal to authority fallacy by stating that Crystal Mason was convicted of voter fraud and sentenced to five years in prison. The author does not provide any evidence or context for this claim. Additionally, the article uses inflammatory rhetoric when describing the situation as a 'political ploy' where minority voting rights are under attack.
The appeal to authority fallacy is evident in the statement that Crystal Mason was convicted of voter fraud and sentenced to five years in prison. No evidence or context for this claim is provided.
Bias
(85%)
The article is biased towards the defendant's claim of not knowing she was ineligible to vote. The author uses quotes from Crystal Mason that suggest she did not know about her eligibility and presents it as fact without providing any evidence or context for why this might be true.
Crystal Mason claims she did not know she wasn't eligible to vote.
Crystal Mason was sentenced to five years in prison for trying to cast a provisional ballot in the 2016 presidential election that was rejected.
Mason attempted to vote even though she was on supervised release (probation) for a tax felony and had no idea she was not eligible.
The court of appeals ruled that Mason's lack of knowledge about her eligibility to vote did not matter in her prosecution, but Texas' highest criminal court overturned the ruling and found insufficient evidence that Mason knew she was ineligible to vote.
Accuracy
No Contradictions at Time
Of
Publication
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author claims that Crystal Mason was sentenced for trying to cast a provisional ballot in the 2016 presidential election that was rejected. However, this statement is false as she attempted to vote because her mother urged her to do so and not because she knew it would be accepted. Secondly, the author states that Crystal Mason has always maintained she had no idea she was ineligible and only tried to cast a ballot due to her mother's urging. However, this statement is also false as there are quotes from witnesses who testified at her trial that they never told her she was ineligible. Thirdly, the author claims that Crystal Mason attempted to vote even though she was still on supervised release for a tax felony. However, it is not clear if this information is accurate or relevant to the case as there are no quotes from witnesses who testified at her trial regarding her status of being on supervised release.
The author claims that Crystal Mason was sentenced for trying to cast a provisional ballot in the 2016 presidential election that was rejected. However, this statement is false as she attempted to vote because her mother urged her to do so and not because she knew it would be accepted.
The author states that Crystal Mason has always maintained she had no idea she was ineligible and only tried to cast a ballot due to her mother's urging. However, this statement is also false as there are quotes from witnesses who testified at her trial that they never told her she was ineligible.
The author claims that Crystal Mason attempted to vote even though she was still on supervised release for a tax felony. However, it is not clear if this information is accurate or relevant to the case as there are no quotes from witnesses who testified at her trial regarding her status of being on supervised release.
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains several fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by citing the court of appeals and Texas's highest criminal court as sources for their ruling on Crystal Mason's case. Additionally, the author presents a dichotomous depiction of Crystal Mason by describing her as both someone who was unaware that she was ineligible to vote and someone who has become politically engaged after her case. The article also contains inflammatory rhetoric when it describes the ruling against Crystal Mason as a political ploy aimed at intimidating Black voters.
The author uses an appeal to authority by citing the court of appeals and Texas's highest criminal court as sources for their ruling on Crystal Mason's case. For example, they write:
Bias
(85%)
The article is biased towards Crystal Mason and her acquittal. The author uses language that dehumanizes the judge who convicted her, such as 'a thinly veiled effort to intimidate Black voters'. Additionally, the author portrays Mason's case as an example of egregious punishment for a voting mistake when it was actually a technicality and she had no intention of committing fraud. The article also uses language that dehumanizes the poll worker who assisted her with filling out the provisional ballot, such as 'poorly designed' and 'crams an admonition in both English and Spanish'. This is biased because it implies that Mason was not capable of understanding what she was signing. The article also uses language that dehumanizes the legal system by portraying them as a political ploy to attack minority voting rights.
The article portrays Mason's case as an example of egregious punishment for a voting mistake when it was actually a technicality and she had no intention of committing fraud.
The article uses language that dehumanizes the legal system by portraying them as a political ploy to attack minority voting rights.
The author uses language such as 'a thinly veiled effort to intimidate Black voters' which is biased towards Crystal Mason and her acquittal.
The author uses language such as 'poorly designed' which is biased towards the poll worker who assisted her with filling out the provisional ballot.
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (0%)
The author has a conflict of interest on the topic of voting errors and acquittals. The article discusses Crystal Mason's acquittal for voter fraud charges in Texas, but fails to disclose that she was previously convicted of tax fraud and is currently serving supervised release/probation for that conviction.
The author does not mention the previous tax felony conviction or probation status of Crystal Mason.
Crystal Mason was found guilty of illegally casting a provisional ballot in the 2016 election.
Mason had been on probation after serving a five-year sentence for federal conspiracy charge and claimed she did not know she was ineligible to vote.
The Texas appeals court reversed its earlier opinion that had upheld Ms. Mason's conviction, acquitting her of the charges.
Accuracy
Mason claims she did not know she wasn't eligible to vote and the appeals court ruled that there was not enough evidence to convict her.
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in that it implies that Crystal Mason was convicted of illegal voting and sentenced to five years in prison for casting a provisional ballot while on supervised release. However, the sentence was overturned by an appeals court because there wasn't enough evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she knew being on supervised release made her ineligible to vote.
The article states that Crystal Mason was convicted of illegal voting and sentenced to five years in prison. However, the sentence was overturned by an appeals court because there wasn't enough evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she knew being on supervised release made her ineligible to vote.
The article implies that Crystal Mason cast a provisional ballot while knowing she was not eligible to vote. However, the appeals court judge wrote that finding Mason not credible and disbelieving her protestation of actual knowledge does not suffice as proof of guilt.
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains an example of a false dilemma fallacy. The author presents the situation as if there are only two options: either Pritchard should receive a light sentence or he should be behind bars for voting illegally. However, this is not true as other Republicans who have been caught casting illegal ballots have also received relatively light sentences.
The author presents the situation as if there are only two options: either Pritchard should receive a light sentence or he should be behind bars for voting illegally. However, this is not true as other Republicans who have been caught casting illegal ballots have also received relatively light sentences.
Bias
(85%)
The article is biased towards the plight of Crystal Mason and her fight for voting rights. The author uses language that depicts Mason as a victim who was wrongfully convicted and sentenced to prison. They also use examples such as Pritchard's light sentence in comparison to Mason's, which are meant to highlight the unfairness of the legal system towards Black women like her.
The Georgia GOP official will not, however, find himself behind bars.
