Gregory Stenstrom, et al. v. Delaware County Board of Elections

Is the spoliation of election materials and evi­ dence, required to be maintained by federal and state law, by election officials to perfect massive election fraud, evidence of said fraud by itself, and/or suffi­ cient to infer adverse verdict?

Do duly appointed, certified poll watchers, who have taken an oath to fulfill their lawful duties as intervenors for both the candidates they represent, and the citizenry, have standing to petition the Courts on their own behalf to remedy grievous viola­ tions of election law, election fraud, and associated civil law?

Does the Court of first remedy in considering alleged grievous election and civil violations (in this case, the Common Pleas Court of Delaware County, Pennsylvania), have a duty to have an evidentiary hearing, and be presented evidence of allegations of massive election fraud that could change the outcome of an election, before ruling there isn’t a “scintilla of evidence” and otherwise ruling on facts not in evidence?

Does immediate notification of spoliation and destruction of election materials required to be maintained by federal and state law for 22 months (or as long as litigative controversy is pending), that proves massive election fraud that could change the outcome of an election, require the Court of first remedy to intervene to secure said evidence, as the lawful arbiter to preserve the integrity of the election system?