Girl 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 neighborhood service for voting her useless mother’s ballot in Arizona in the 2020 common election.

However the judge rejected a prosecutor’s request that she serve at least 30 days in jail as a result of she lied to investigators and demanded that they hold those committing voter fraud accountable.

The case against Tracey Kay McKee, 64, is one in every of only a handful of voter fraud cases from Arizona’s 2020 election which have led to expenses, despite widespread perception 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 judge handed down her sentence. McKee stated that she was grieving over the lack of her mom and had no intent to influence the end result of the election.

“Your Honor, I want to apologize,” McKee told LaBianca. “I don’t want to make the excuse for my habits. What I did was flawed and I’m prepared to accept the consequences handed down by the courtroom.”

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

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

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

“And I don’t imagine that this was a fair election,” she continued. “I do imagine 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 comparable violations of voting someone else’s ballot, and stated nobody got jail time in these circumstances. He mentioned agreeing with Lawson that McKee ought to do 30 days jail time would raise constitutional problems with equity.

“Simply stated, over an extended time period, in voluminous instances, 67 cases, nobody in this state for comparable instances, in comparable context ... nobody acquired jail time,” Henze stated. “The courtroom didn’t impose jail time at all.”

However Lawson mentioned jail time was necessary because the kind of case has modified. While in years past, most instances concerned folks voting in two states as a result of they both lived in or had property in both states, in the 2020 election people had bought into Trump’s claims of widespread voter fraud.

“What we’re listening to is voter fraud is out there,” Lawson instructed the decide. “And primarily what we’re seeing here is someone who says ‘Well, I’m going to commit voter fraud as a result of it’s a giant downside 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 in any respect,” he mentioned. “And I think the perspective you hear within the interview is the attitude that differentiates this case from the other 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 evidence that this crime was on the rise, and that heightened deterrence may be called for, the court might order jail time,” LaBianca said. “But the document here does not present that this crime is on the rise.

“And abhorrent as it may be for somebody just like the defendant to attack the legitimacy of our free elections without any evidence, besides your individual fraud, such statements should not unlawful so far as I know,” the judge continued.