Woman avoids jail for voting lifeless mother’s ballot 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 useless mom’s poll in Arizona within the 2020 common 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 these 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 belief 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 Judge Margaret LaBianca before the judge handed down her sentence. McKee stated that she was grieving over the loss of her mother and had no intent to affect the outcome of the election.

“Your Honor, I would like to apologize,” McKee informed LaBianca. “I don’t want to make the excuse for my behavior. What I did was incorrect and I’m prepared to accept the consequences handed down by the courtroom.”

Both McKee and her mom, 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 Attorney Normal Todd Lawson played a tape of McKee being interviewed by an investigator together with his workplace the place she said there was rampant voter fraud and denied that she had signed and returned her mom’s poll.

“The only approach to prevent voter fraud is to bodily go in and punch a ballot,” 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 believe there was numerous voter fraud.”

Tom Henze, McKee’s legal professional, pointed to dozens of cases of voter fraud prosecuted in Arizona over the previous decade, many for related violations of voting someone else’s ballot, and mentioned no one bought jail time in these cases. He stated agreeing with Lawson that McKee should do 30 days jail time would raise constitutional issues of fairness.

“Simply acknowledged, over a long time frame, in voluminous circumstances, 67 instances, no one on this state for comparable circumstances, in related context ... no one obtained jail time,” Henze said. “The court didn’t impose jail time in any respect.”

But Lawson stated jail time was vital as a result of the kind of case has modified. Whereas in years past, most instances concerned folks voting in two states because they both lived in or had property in both states, in the 2020 election people had bought into Trump’s claims of widespread voter fraud.

“What we’re hearing is voter fraud is out there,” Lawson told the decide. “And basically what we’re seeing here is someone who says ‘Well, I’m going to commit voter fraud as a result of it’s a giant downside and I’m just going to slip in beneath the radar. And I’m going to do it because everyone else is doing it and I can get away with it.’

“I don’t subscribe to that at all,” he mentioned. “And I believe the angle you hear within the interview is the perspective that differentiates this case from the other instances.”

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

“And if there were proof that this crime was on the rise, and that heightened deterrence could also be called for, the court docket might order jail time,” LaBianca stated. “But the file right here doesn't show that this crime is on the rise.

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