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 group 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 no less than 30 days in jail because she lied to investigators and demanded that they hold those committing voter fraud accountable.

The case in opposition to Tracey Kay McKee, 64, is considered one of just a handful of voter fraud instances from Arizona’s 2020 election which have led to expenses, despite 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 Choose Margaret LaBianca earlier than 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 advised LaBianca. “I don’t need to make the excuse for my habits. What I did was flawed and I’m ready to accept the implications handed down by the court.”

Both McKee and her mom, Mary Arendt, had been registered Republicans, although she was not asked if she voted for Trump. Arendt died on Oct. 5, 2020, two days earlier than early ballots were mailed to voters.

Assistant Attorney Common Todd Lawson performed a tape of McKee being interviewed by an investigator with his office the place she stated there was rampant voter fraud and denied that she had signed and returned her mom’s poll.

“The only solution to forestall voter fraud is to physically go in and punch a ballot,” McKee informed the investigator. “I imply, voter fraud goes to be prevalent as long as there’s mail-in voting, for sure. I imply, there’s no way to ensure a fair election.

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

Tom Henze, McKee’s attorney, pointed to dozens of instances of voter fraud prosecuted in Arizona over the previous decade, many for similar violations of voting someone else’s ballot, and said nobody obtained jail time in these circumstances. He stated agreeing with Lawson that McKee ought to do 30 days jail time would raise constitutional problems with equity.

“Simply stated, over a protracted time period, in voluminous instances, 67 circumstances, nobody in this state for comparable cases, in related context ... no person obtained jail time,” Henze mentioned. “The courtroom didn’t impose jail time in any respect.”

But Lawson stated jail time was essential as a result of the type of case has modified. While in years past, most cases involved individuals voting in two states because they both lived in or had property in both states, in 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 told the choose. “And primarily what we’re seeing here is someone who says ‘Properly, I’m going to commit voter fraud as a result of it’s a giant problem and I’m just going to slide in underneath the radar. And I’m going to do it as a result of all people else is doing it and I can get away with it.’

“I don’t subscribe to that at all,” he said. “And I think the attitude you hear in the interview is the attitude that differentiates this case from the opposite circumstances.”

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

“And if there have been evidence that this crime was on the rise, and that heightened deterrence could also be called for, the court docket may order jail time,” LaBianca said. “But the report right here doesn't show that this crime is on the rise.

“And abhorrent as it could be for someone just like the defendant to assault the legitimacy of our free elections without any evidence, besides your own fraud, such statements usually are not illegal as far as I know,” the decide continued.