Lady avoids jail for voting lifeless mom’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 dead mom’s poll in Arizona in the 2020 normal election.

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

The case towards Tracey Kay McKee, 64, is one among only a handful of voter fraud instances 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 docket Decide Margaret LaBianca earlier than the decide handed down her sentence. McKee stated that she was grieving over the lack of her mother and had no intent to affect the outcome of the election.

“Your Honor, I wish to apologize,” McKee advised LaBianca. “I don’t wish to make the excuse for my conduct. What I did was fallacious and I’m ready to just accept the consequences handed down by the courtroom.”

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

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

“The only technique to stop voter fraud is to physically go in and punch a poll,” McKee instructed the investigator. “I mean, voter fraud goes to be prevalent so long as there’s mail-in voting, for certain. I imply, there’s no manner to ensure a good election.

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

Tom Henze, McKee’s attorney, pointed to dozens of circumstances of voter fraud prosecuted in Arizona over the past decade, many for related violations of voting another person’s ballot, and stated nobody got jail time in these circumstances. He stated agreeing with Lawson that McKee should do 30 days jail time would elevate constitutional issues of equity.

“Simply stated, over a long time period, in voluminous instances, 67 circumstances, no one on this state for related instances, in similar context ... no person acquired jail time,” Henze said. “The court didn’t impose jail time at all.”

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

“What we’re hearing is voter fraud is out there,” Lawson advised the choose. “And primarily what we’re seeing right here is someone who says ‘Nicely, I’m going to commit voter fraud because it’s an enormous downside and I’m just going to slide in underneath 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 stated. “And I think the perspective you hear in the interview is the angle that differentiates this case from the other instances.”

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

“And if there were proof that this crime was on the rise, and that heightened deterrence may be called for, the court docket might order jail time,” LaBianca mentioned. “However the record here does not present that this crime is on the rise.

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