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

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

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

The case towards Tracey Kay McKee, 64, is one of just a handful of voter fraud instances from Arizona’s 2020 election which have led to costs, despite widespread perception amongst 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 however now lives in California, sobbed as she apologized to Maricopa County Superior Courtroom Choose Margaret LaBianca earlier than the decide handed down her sentence. McKee mentioned that she was grieving over the lack of her mom and had no intent to influence the outcome of the election.

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

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

Assistant Lawyer Normal Todd Lawson performed a tape of McKee being interviewed by an investigator along with his office where she stated there was rampant voter fraud and denied that she had signed and returned her mother’s ballot.

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

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

Tom Henze, McKee’s attorney, pointed to dozens of instances of voter fraud prosecuted in Arizona over the past decade, many for similar violations of voting someone else’s ballot, and said nobody received jail time in those cases. He mentioned agreeing with Lawson that McKee should do 30 days jail time would raise constitutional problems with fairness.

“Simply acknowledged, over a long time period, in voluminous cases, 67 circumstances, nobody in this state for comparable cases, in similar context ... nobody got jail time,” Henze mentioned. “The court didn’t impose jail time in any respect.”

But Lawson stated jail time was necessary as a result of the type of case has changed. While in years past, most instances concerned folks voting in two states as a result of they both 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 hearing is voter fraud is out there,” Lawson advised the choose. “And essentially what we’re seeing here is someone who says ‘Properly, I’m going to commit voter fraud as a result of it’s a giant drawback and I’m simply going to slip in under the radar. And I’m going to do it because all people else is doing it and I can get away with it.’

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

LaBianca said that whereas she agreed with Lawson, ordering jail time would give McKee what she told the investigator what she wished: going after individuals who committed voter fraud.

“And if there have been evidence that this crime was on the rise, and that heightened deterrence could also be referred to as for, the courtroom would possibly order jail time,” LaBianca said. “But the file right here doesn't present that this crime is on the rise.

“And abhorrent as it could be for somebody like the defendant to attack the legitimacy of our free elections without any evidence, except your individual fraud, such statements aren't illegal so far as I do know,” the decide continued.