Woman avoids jail for voting useless mom’s poll in Arizona

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

However the decide rejected a prosecutor’s request that she serve at least 30 days in jail as a result of she lied to investigators and demanded that they maintain these committing voter fraud accountable.

The case against Tracey Kay McKee, 64, is one in every of only a handful of voter fraud circumstances from Arizona’s 2020 election that have led to expenses, regardless of widespread perception amongst 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 however now lives in California, sobbed as she apologized to Maricopa County Superior Court docket Choose Margaret LaBianca before the decide handed down her sentence. McKee said that she was grieving over the lack of her mom and had no intent to impact the end result of the election.

“Your Honor, I wish to apologize,” McKee advised LaBianca. “I don’t wish to make the excuse for my behavior. What I did was wrong and I’m ready to just accept the results handed down by the courtroom.”

Both McKee and her mom, Mary Arendt, have been registered Republicans, though 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 Normal Todd Lawson performed a tape of McKee being interviewed by an investigator along with his office the place she stated there was rampant voter fraud and denied that she had signed and returned her mother’s poll.

“The only way to stop voter fraud is to physically go in and punch a ballot,” McKee instructed the investigator. “I mean, voter fraud is going to be prevalent so long as there’s mail-in voting, for positive. I imply, there’s no manner to ensure a fair election.

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

Tom Henze, McKee’s attorney, pointed to dozens of circumstances of voter fraud prosecuted in Arizona over the previous decade, many for similar violations of voting another person’s ballot, and said nobody received jail time in those cases. He stated agreeing with Lawson that McKee ought to do 30 days jail time would increase constitutional problems with equity.

“Merely stated, over a long time period, in voluminous circumstances, 67 instances, no one in this state for related circumstances, in similar context ... no one received jail time,” Henze stated. “The court didn’t impose jail time at all.”

But Lawson stated jail time was necessary as a result of the type of case has modified. While in years past, most instances involved folks voting in two states as a result of they either lived in or had property in each states, within the 2020 election folks had bought into Trump’s claims of widespread voter fraud.

“What we’re listening to is voter fraud is on the market,” Lawson advised the judge. “And basically what we’re seeing here is somebody who says ‘Effectively, I’m going to commit voter fraud because it’s a big drawback and I’m just going to slip in underneath the radar. And I’m going to do it as a result of everybody else is doing it and I can get away with it.’

“I don’t subscribe to that at all,” he said. “And I think the attitude you hear in the interview is the attitude that differentiates this case from the opposite circumstances.”

LaBianca mentioned that while she agreed with Lawson, ordering jail time would give McKee what she informed the investigator what she needed: going after individuals who dedicated voter fraud.

“And if there have been proof that this crime was on the rise, and that heightened deterrence may be referred to as for, the courtroom may order jail time,” LaBianca stated. “However the report here does not show that this crime is on the rise.

“And abhorrent as it might be for someone just like the defendant to assault the legitimacy of our free elections without any evidence, except your personal fraud, such statements are usually not illegal as far as I know,” the choose continued.