Woman avoids jail for voting dead mother’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 dead mom’s ballot in Arizona in the 2020 basic election.

But the judge rejected a prosecutor’s request that she serve a minimum of 30 days in jail because she lied to investigators and demanded that they hold those committing voter fraud accountable.

The case against Tracey Kay McKee, 64, is one among only a handful of voter fraud circumstances from Arizona’s 2020 election that have led to fees, regardless of widespread perception 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 Courtroom Choose Margaret LaBianca earlier than the decide handed down her sentence. McKee said that she was grieving over the lack of her mother and had no intent to affect the end result of the election.

“Your Honor, I want to apologize,” McKee informed LaBianca. “I don’t want to make the excuse for my behavior. What I did was improper and I’m ready to simply accept the implications handed down by the courtroom.”

Each 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 Common Todd Lawson performed a tape of McKee being interviewed by an investigator together 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 one method to stop voter fraud is to physically go in and punch a ballot,” McKee told the investigator. “I imply, voter fraud is going to be prevalent as long as there’s mail-in voting, for certain. I imply, there’s no method to ensure a good election.

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

Tom Henze, McKee’s attorney, pointed to dozens of cases of voter fraud prosecuted in Arizona over the past decade, many for comparable violations of voting another person’s poll, and mentioned no one obtained jail time in these cases. He said agreeing with Lawson that McKee ought to do 30 days jail time would raise constitutional problems with equity.

“Merely acknowledged, over a long time period, in voluminous circumstances, 67 cases, nobody in this state for related instances, in similar context ... nobody received jail time,” Henze stated. “The courtroom 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 cases involved individuals voting in two states as a result of they both lived in or had property in each states, in the 2020 election folks had bought into Trump’s claims of widespread voter fraud.

“What we’re listening to is voter fraud is on the market,” Lawson informed the choose. “And essentially what we’re seeing right here is somebody who says ‘Properly, I’m going to commit voter fraud as a result of it’s an enormous drawback and I’m simply 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 in any respect,” he stated. “And I think the attitude you hear within the interview is the angle that differentiates this case from the opposite cases.”

LaBianca said that whereas she agreed with Lawson, ordering jail time would give McKee what she instructed 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 may be known as for, the court docket may order jail time,” LaBianca mentioned. “But the file right here does not 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 evidence, except your individual fraud, such statements are not unlawful as far as I do know,” the judge continued.