Woman avoids jail for voting lifeless mother’s ballot in Arizona

PHOENIX (AP) — A choose in Phoenix on Friday sentenced a lady o two years of felony probation, fines and community service for voting her useless mom’s poll in Arizona in the 2020 normal election.

But the judge rejected a prosecutor’s request that she serve not less than 30 days in jail as a result of she lied to investigators and demanded that they hold those committing voter fraud accountable.

The case towards Tracey Kay McKee, 64, is one of only a handful of voter fraud circumstances from Arizona’s 2020 election which have led to prices, regardless of widespread perception among many supporters of former President Donald Trump that there was widespread voter fraud that led to his loss in Arizona and other battleground states.

McKee, who was from Phoenix suburb of Scottsdale but now lives in California, sobbed as she apologized to Maricopa County Superior Courtroom Choose Margaret LaBianca before the decide handed down her sentence. McKee mentioned that she was grieving over the lack of her mother and had no intent to influence the end result of the election.

“Your Honor, I want to apologize,” McKee advised LaBianca. “I don’t need to make the excuse for my conduct. What I did was fallacious and I’m prepared to simply accept the results handed down by the court.”

Each McKee and her mother, Mary Arendt, had been registered Republicans, although she was not requested if she voted for Trump. Arendt died on Oct. 5, 2020, two days earlier than early ballots had been mailed to voters.

Assistant Attorney Basic Todd Lawson performed a tape of McKee being interviewed by an investigator together with his office where she said there was rampant voter fraud and denied that she had signed and returned her mom’s poll.

“The only solution to stop voter fraud is to physically go in and punch a ballot,” McKee told the investigator. “I mean, voter fraud goes to be prevalent as long as there’s mail-in voting, for sure. I imply, there’s no approach to make sure a good election.

“And I don’t consider that this was a good election,” she continued. “I do imagine there was lots of voter fraud.”

Tom Henze, McKee’s legal professional, pointed to dozens of circumstances of voter fraud prosecuted in Arizona over the past decade, many for similar violations of voting another person’s poll, and stated nobody bought jail time in these circumstances. He stated agreeing with Lawson that McKee ought to do 30 days jail time would raise constitutional problems with fairness.

“Merely said, over a protracted time frame, in voluminous instances, 67 circumstances, no person in this state for similar cases, in comparable context ... no person got jail time,” Henze said. “The court docket didn’t impose jail time in any respect.”

However Lawson said jail time was vital as a result of the kind of case has changed. Whereas in years past, most instances involved folks voting in two states because they both lived in or had property in each states, within the 2020 election individuals had bought into Trump’s claims of widespread voter fraud.

“What we’re hearing is voter fraud is out there,” Lawson advised the choose. “And basically what we’re seeing right here is somebody who says ‘Properly, I’m going to commit voter fraud because it’s a big downside and I’m simply going to slip in under the radar. And I’m going to do it as a result of everyone else is doing it and I can get away with it.’

“I don’t subscribe to that in any respect,” he stated. “And I believe the perspective you hear in the interview is the angle that differentiates this case from the other circumstances.”

LaBianca mentioned that while she agreed with Lawson, ordering jail time would give McKee what she instructed the investigator what she wished: going after people who committed voter fraud.

“And if there were evidence that this crime was on the rise, and that heightened deterrence may be referred to as for, the court may order jail time,” LaBianca mentioned. “However the document right here doesn't show that this crime is on the rise.

“And abhorrent as it might be for somebody just like the defendant to attack the legitimacy of our free elections with none evidence, besides your own fraud, such statements should not unlawful so far as I do know,” the decide continued.