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

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

However the judge 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 these committing voter fraud accountable.

The case in opposition to Tracey Kay McKee, 64, is considered one of only a handful of voter fraud cases from Arizona’s 2020 election which have led to costs, 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 Judge Margaret LaBianca before the choose handed down her sentence. McKee said that she was grieving over the lack of her mother and had no intent to influence the end result of the election.

“Your Honor, I wish to apologize,” McKee instructed LaBianca. “I don’t need to make the excuse for my conduct. What I did was unsuitable and I’m ready to just accept the results handed down by the court docket.”

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 had been mailed to voters.

Assistant Legal professional General 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 mother’s poll.

“The only solution to prevent voter fraud is to bodily go in and punch a ballot,” McKee told the investigator. “I mean, voter fraud is going to be prevalent as long as there’s mail-in voting, for positive. I mean, there’s no manner to ensure a good election.

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

Tom Henze, McKee’s lawyer, pointed to dozens of instances of voter fraud prosecuted in Arizona over the previous decade, many for comparable violations of voting another person’s ballot, and stated no one got jail time in those circumstances. He mentioned agreeing with Lawson that McKee should do 30 days jail time would increase constitutional issues of equity.

“Merely stated, over an extended time frame, in voluminous circumstances, 67 circumstances, no one on this state for related circumstances, in comparable context ... no person obtained jail time,” Henze said. “The court docket didn’t impose jail time at all.”

However Lawson mentioned jail time was necessary because the kind of case has changed. While in years previous, most instances involved individuals voting in two states as a result of they both lived in or had property in both states, within the 2020 election folks had purchased into Trump’s claims of widespread voter fraud.

“What we’re listening to is voter fraud is out there,” Lawson instructed the decide. “And essentially what we’re seeing right here is someone who says ‘Well, I’m going to commit voter fraud because it’s a big downside and I’m simply going to slip in underneath 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 at all,” he stated. “And I think the attitude 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 informed 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 referred to as for, the court docket would possibly order jail time,” LaBianca said. “But the record here doesn't show that this crime is on the rise.

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