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

PHOENIX (AP) — A choose in Phoenix on Friday sentenced a lady o two years of felony probation, fines and community service for voting her lifeless mom’s poll in Arizona within the 2020 normal election.

However the judge rejected a prosecutor’s request that she serve at the very 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 considered one of only a handful of voter fraud instances from Arizona’s 2020 election which have led to prices, 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 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 Choose Margaret LaBianca earlier than the judge handed down her sentence. McKee said that she was grieving over the loss of her mother and had no intent to influence the result of the election.

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

Both McKee and her mom, 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 were mailed to voters.

Assistant Lawyer Basic Todd Lawson played a tape of McKee being interviewed by an investigator along with his workplace the place she said there was rampant voter fraud and denied that she had signed and returned her mom’s ballot.

“The only approach to stop voter fraud is to bodily go in and punch a ballot,” McKee advised the investigator. “I imply, voter fraud is going to be prevalent so long as there’s mail-in voting, for certain. I mean, there’s no approach to make sure a fair election.

“And I don’t consider that this was a fair election,” she continued. “I do consider there was quite a lot 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 poll, and mentioned nobody acquired jail time in those circumstances. He mentioned agreeing with Lawson that McKee ought to do 30 days jail time would raise constitutional issues of fairness.

“Simply acknowledged, over an extended time period, in voluminous instances, 67 circumstances, nobody on this state for related cases, in comparable context ... no one bought jail time,” Henze said. “The court docket didn’t impose jail time at all.”

However Lawson said jail time was important because the kind of case has changed. Whereas in years previous, most circumstances concerned individuals voting in two states as a result of they both lived in or had property in both states, within the 2020 election individuals had bought into Trump’s claims of widespread voter fraud.

“What we’re listening to is voter fraud is on the market,” Lawson advised the judge. “And essentially what we’re seeing here is somebody who says ‘Well, I’m going to commit voter fraud as a result of it’s an enormous drawback and I’m simply going to slip in under the radar. And I’m going to do it because 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 feel the angle you hear in the interview is the attitude that differentiates this case from the opposite instances.”

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

“And if there were proof that this crime was on the rise, and that heightened deterrence may be called for, the court might order jail time,” LaBianca mentioned. “However the record right here doesn't show that this crime is on the rise.

“And abhorrent as it might be for someone like the defendant to assault the legitimacy of our free elections without any proof, except your own fraud, such statements will not be illegal as far as I do know,” the decide continued.