And I would agree. Which is why it's relieving that it in fact we have not seen those numbers in Crimea.
In fact, some of the more reliable and neutral press in the West, such as Der Spiegel (you'll know them from the fact that people like Snowden and Assange trusted them enough to give them the source materials for redaction) posts stories like these today:
Juicy quote: "Nevertheless, the situation here is not as unambiguous as it was on the Crimean Peninsula" when talking about situation in Eastern Ukraine. In other words, they agree that situation in Crimea has had little ambiguity - people by far and large wanted to join Russia and they got their wish.
Considering that euronews mentioned in the a footnote of their story on pullout of Ukrainian troops from Crimea after the annexation that "2/3 to 3/4 of the ukrainian soldiers are actually staying behind because they deserted before or during the conflict in Crimea", we can see that desperate attempts to claim that Crimea's vote wasn't geniunely democratic have little merit.
About the only argument you can make is that situation was orchestrated to manipulate public opinion. But if we call that an offence that makes referendums and political decisions invalid, shouldn't we have already put other people who have been proven to have used massive disinformation to get the outcome they wanted in prison, such as former US president G.W. Bush? And can we really argue that Russia is in this alone, and West has not been the prime instigator of current situation with Russia being the massive loser who's merely reacting? They lost entire country of Ukraine after all, with all its industrial base. This isn't some crappy third world oil producer - they make things like engine parts for space rockets. And they are historically ally of Russia throughout several centuries against threats like Ottoman slaver empire or Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth, not to even mention being the birthplace of modern Russian culture.