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

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

But the judge rejected a prosecutor’s request that she serve no less than 30 days in jail because she lied to investigators and demanded that they hold these committing voter fraud accountable.

The case against Tracey Kay McKee, 64, is one in every of only a handful of voter fraud circumstances from Arizona’s 2020 election that have led to prices, 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 different battleground states.

McKee, who was from Phoenix suburb of Scottsdale however now lives in California, sobbed as she apologized to Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Margaret LaBianca before the choose handed down her sentence. McKee mentioned that she was grieving over the lack of her mother and had no intent to influence the outcome of the election.

“Your Honor, I would like to apologize,” McKee advised LaBianca. “I don’t wish to make the excuse for my conduct. What I did was improper and I’m ready 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 have been mailed to voters.

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

“The one approach to stop voter fraud is to physically go in and punch a ballot,” McKee instructed 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 manner to ensure a fair election.

“And I don’t imagine that this was a good election,” she continued. “I do consider there was plenty 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 similar violations of voting another person’s ballot, and stated no one 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 said, over a long time period, in voluminous cases, 67 instances, no one on this state for related circumstances, in similar context ... nobody acquired jail time,” Henze stated. “The courtroom didn’t impose jail time in any respect.”

However Lawson said jail time was important because the type of case has changed. Whereas in years previous, most instances involved individuals voting in two states as a result of 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 told the decide. “And primarily what we’re seeing here is somebody who says ‘Properly, I’m going to commit voter fraud as a result of it’s a big drawback and I’m simply going to slide in under 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 perspective you hear within the interview is the angle that differentiates this case from the opposite circumstances.”

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

“And if there were evidence that this crime was on the rise, and that heightened deterrence may be known as for, the courtroom would possibly order jail time,” LaBianca stated. “However the document here does not present that this crime is on the rise.

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