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

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

But the decide 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 maintain those committing voter fraud accountable.

The case against Tracey Kay McKee, 64, is considered one of just a handful of voter fraud circumstances from Arizona’s 2020 election that have led to charges, 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 however now lives in California, sobbed as she apologized to Maricopa County Superior Courtroom Choose Margaret LaBianca before the decide 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 would like to apologize,” McKee instructed LaBianca. “I don’t need to make the excuse for my habits. What I did was fallacious and I’m prepared to accept the results handed down by the courtroom.”

Each McKee and her mother, Mary Arendt, were registered Republicans, although 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 Attorney Basic Todd Lawson performed a tape of McKee being interviewed by an investigator together with his office where she mentioned there was rampant voter fraud and denied that she had signed and returned her mother’s ballot.

“The only technique to prevent voter fraud is to physically go in and punch a ballot,” McKee informed the investigator. “I mean, voter fraud goes to be prevalent so long as there’s mail-in voting, for positive. I imply, there’s no method to make sure a fair election.

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

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

“Simply said, over a protracted period of time, in voluminous cases, 67 cases, no one on this state for related cases, in related context ... no one acquired jail time,” Henze mentioned. “The court didn’t impose jail time in any respect.”

But Lawson stated jail time was vital because the type of case has modified. While 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, within the 2020 election folks had bought into Trump’s claims of widespread voter fraud.

“What we’re hearing is voter fraud is on the market,” Lawson told the decide. “And basically what we’re seeing here is someone who says ‘Nicely, I’m going to commit voter fraud as a result of it’s an enormous problem and I’m simply going to slip in under 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 in any respect,” he mentioned. “And I believe the angle you hear in the interview is the attitude that differentiates this case from the other instances.”

LaBianca mentioned that whereas she agreed with Lawson, ordering jail time would give McKee what she told the investigator what she wished: going after people who dedicated 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 may order jail time,” LaBianca said. “But the file right here doesn't present that this crime is on the rise.

“And abhorrent as it may be for someone just like the defendant to assault the legitimacy of our free elections with none proof, besides your personal fraud, such statements should not illegal as far as I know,” the choose continued.