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 community service for voting her dead mom’s ballot in Arizona in the 2020 normal election.

But the decide rejected a prosecutor’s request that she serve at the very 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 towards Tracey Kay McKee, 64, is certainly one of just a handful of voter fraud circumstances from Arizona’s 2020 election that have led to fees, 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 Court Decide Margaret LaBianca before the decide handed down her sentence. McKee stated that she was grieving over the lack of her mother and had no intent to impression the outcome of the election.

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

Each McKee and her mother, 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 Common Todd Lawson performed a tape of McKee being interviewed by an investigator together with his office the place she stated there was rampant voter fraud and denied that she had signed and returned her mom’s ballot.

“The only approach to prevent voter fraud is to physically go in and punch a ballot,” McKee advised the investigator. “I imply, voter fraud goes to be prevalent so long as there’s mail-in voting, for certain. I mean, there’s no approach to ensure a good election.

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

Tom Henze, McKee’s lawyer, pointed to dozens of cases of voter fraud prosecuted in Arizona over the past decade, many for comparable violations of voting another person’s ballot, and said nobody acquired jail time in those cases. He said agreeing with Lawson that McKee ought to do 30 days jail time would elevate constitutional issues of fairness.

“Simply said, over an extended time period, in voluminous circumstances, 67 cases, no one in this state for related circumstances, in related context ... nobody got jail time,” Henze said. “The courtroom didn’t impose jail time at all.”

But Lawson mentioned jail time was vital because the kind of case has changed. Whereas in years previous, most instances concerned people voting in two states as a result of they either 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 on the market,” Lawson advised the decide. “And essentially what we’re seeing right here is someone who says ‘Nicely, I’m going to commit voter fraud as a result of it’s a big problem and I’m simply going to slide in beneath 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 stated. “And I think the attitude you hear in the interview is the perspective that differentiates this case from the opposite cases.”

LaBianca said that whereas she agreed with Lawson, ordering jail time would give McKee what she informed the investigator what she wanted: 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 called for, the court may order jail time,” LaBianca mentioned. “However the record here doesn't present that this crime is on the rise.

“And abhorrent as it may be for somebody like the defendant to assault the legitimacy of our free elections with none evidence, except your individual fraud, such statements usually are not illegal so far as I know,” the choose continued.