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

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

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

The case towards Tracey Kay McKee, 64, is considered one of just a handful of voter fraud instances from Arizona’s 2020 election that have led to costs, despite widespread perception among many supporters of former President Donald Trump that there was widespread voter fraud that led to his loss in Arizona and different battleground states.

McKee, who was from Phoenix suburb of Scottsdale but now lives in California, sobbed as she apologized to Maricopa County Superior Courtroom Decide Margaret LaBianca earlier than the decide handed down her sentence. McKee stated that she was grieving over the loss of her mother and had no intent to influence the outcome of the election.

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

Both McKee and her mother, Mary Arendt, have been registered Republicans, though she was not asked if she voted for Trump. Arendt died on Oct. 5, 2020, two days before early ballots had been mailed to voters.

Assistant Lawyer Basic Todd Lawson performed a tape of McKee being interviewed by an investigator along with his workplace the place she mentioned there was rampant voter fraud and denied that she had signed and returned her mom’s ballot.

“The only method to stop voter fraud is to physically go in and punch a poll,” McKee advised the investigator. “I mean, voter fraud is going to be prevalent so long as there’s mail-in voting, for sure. I mean, there’s no method to make sure a good election.

“And I don’t believe 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 instances of voter fraud prosecuted in Arizona over the past decade, many for related violations of voting someone else’s ballot, and mentioned no one acquired jail time in these instances. He stated agreeing with Lawson that McKee ought to do 30 days jail time would elevate constitutional issues of equity.

“Merely stated, over an extended time frame, in voluminous cases, 67 cases, no person in this state for related circumstances, in related context ... no one got jail time,” Henze stated. “The court didn’t impose jail time at all.”

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

“What we’re listening to is voter fraud is out there,” Lawson instructed the choose. “And essentially what we’re seeing right here is somebody who says ‘Nicely, I’m going to commit voter fraud because it’s an enormous problem 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 in any respect,” he mentioned. “And I believe the angle you hear within the interview is the perspective that differentiates this case from the other cases.”

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

“And if there have been proof that this crime was on the rise, and that heightened deterrence could also be referred to as for, the court docket might order jail time,” LaBianca stated. “But the file right here does not show that this crime is on the rise.

“And abhorrent as it may be for someone just like the defendant to attack the legitimacy of our free elections with none evidence, besides your individual fraud, such statements usually are not illegal as far as I do know,” the judge continued.