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

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

But the judge 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 towards Tracey Kay McKee, 64, is considered one of only a handful of voter fraud instances from Arizona’s 2020 election that have led to fees, 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 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 mentioned that she was grieving over the loss of her mom and had no intent to impact the result of the election.

“Your Honor, I wish to apologize,” McKee told LaBianca. “I don’t wish to make the excuse for my behavior. What I did was fallacious and I’m prepared to just accept the implications handed down by the court.”

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

Assistant Attorney Normal Todd Lawson played a tape of McKee being interviewed by an investigator along with his office the place she stated there was rampant voter fraud and denied that she had signed and returned her mother’s ballot.

“The only strategy to forestall voter fraud is to bodily go in and punch a poll,” McKee advised the investigator. “I imply, voter fraud goes to be prevalent as long as there’s mail-in voting, for positive. I imply, there’s no means to ensure a fair election.

“And I don’t imagine that this was a good election,” she continued. “I do believe there was plenty 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 related violations of voting another person’s poll, and stated nobody acquired jail time in those cases. He said agreeing with Lawson that McKee ought to do 30 days jail time would raise constitutional problems with equity.

“Simply acknowledged, over a protracted period of time, in voluminous instances, 67 circumstances, no person on this state for similar instances, in related context ... no person received jail time,” Henze mentioned. “The court didn’t impose jail time in any respect.”

However Lawson mentioned jail time was essential as a result of the type of case has modified. Whereas in years previous, most instances concerned people voting in two states as a result of they both 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 on the market,” Lawson informed the judge. “And primarily what we’re seeing right here is someone 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 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 in any respect,” he said. “And I believe the attitude you hear in the interview is the perspective that differentiates this case from the opposite cases.”

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

“And if there have been proof that this crime was on the rise, and that heightened deterrence may be known as 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 could be for somebody like the defendant to assault the legitimacy of our free elections with none evidence, except your individual fraud, such statements are not unlawful as far as I do know,” the judge continued.