Lady avoids jail for voting useless mother’s ballot in Arizona

PHOENIX (AP) — A choose in Phoenix on Friday sentenced a woman o two years of felony probation, fines and group service for voting her useless mom’s ballot in Arizona within the 2020 common election.

However the choose rejected a prosecutor’s request that she serve not less than 30 days in jail as a result of she lied to investigators and demanded that they hold those committing voter fraud accountable.

The case against Tracey Kay McKee, 64, is one of just a handful of voter fraud cases from Arizona’s 2020 election which have led to fees, regardless of widespread belief 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 judge handed down her sentence. McKee said that she was grieving over the loss of her mother and had no intent to impression the outcome of the election.

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

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

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

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

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

“Simply acknowledged, over an extended period of time, in voluminous circumstances, 67 instances, no person on this state for comparable circumstances, in related context ... no person received jail time,” Henze stated. “The court docket didn’t impose jail time in any respect.”

But Lawson said jail time was important as a result of the kind of case has modified. While in years past, most cases concerned people voting in two states because they both lived in or had property in each states, in the 2020 election folks had purchased into Trump’s claims of widespread voter fraud.

“What we’re hearing is voter fraud is out there,” Lawson informed the choose. “And essentially what we’re seeing right here is somebody who says ‘Well, I’m going to commit voter fraud because it’s a big problem and I’m simply going to slip in below 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 perspective you hear within the interview is the angle that differentiates this case from the other cases.”

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

“And if there were evidence that this crime was on the rise, and that heightened deterrence could also be known as for, the court docket would possibly order jail time,” LaBianca mentioned. “But the record here doesn't show that this crime is on the rise.

“And abhorrent as it may be for somebody just like the defendant to attack the legitimacy of our free elections with none proof, besides your personal fraud, such statements aren't unlawful so far as I do know,” the choose continued.