Lady avoids jail for voting useless mom’s ballot in Arizona

PHOENIX (AP) — A decide in Phoenix on Friday sentenced a lady o two years of felony probation, fines and neighborhood service for voting her dead mom’s poll in Arizona in the 2020 normal 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 these committing voter fraud accountable.

The case in opposition to Tracey Kay McKee, 64, is one of just a handful of voter fraud circumstances from Arizona’s 2020 election which have led to charges, 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 different battleground states.

McKee, who was from Phoenix suburb of Scottsdale however now lives in California, sobbed as she apologized to Maricopa County Superior Courtroom Judge Margaret LaBianca earlier than the choose 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 would like to apologize,” McKee informed LaBianca. “I don’t need to make the excuse for my behavior. What I did was wrong and I’m prepared to simply accept the consequences handed down by the courtroom.”

Each McKee and her mother, Mary Arendt, have 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 General Todd Lawson played a tape of McKee being interviewed by an investigator along with his workplace where she mentioned there was rampant voter fraud and denied that she had signed and returned her mother’s ballot.

“The one technique to prevent voter fraud is to bodily go in and punch a ballot,” McKee told the investigator. “I mean, voter fraud goes to be prevalent so long as there’s mail-in voting, for certain. I mean, there’s no method to ensure a fair election.

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

Tom Henze, McKee’s legal professional, pointed to dozens of circumstances of voter fraud prosecuted in Arizona over the previous decade, many for related violations of voting another person’s ballot, and mentioned nobody bought jail time in these circumstances. He stated agreeing with Lawson that McKee ought to do 30 days jail time would raise constitutional problems with fairness.

“Merely said, over a protracted time period, in voluminous cases, 67 instances, no one in this state for related instances, in related context ... no one obtained jail time,” Henze mentioned. “The court docket didn’t impose jail time at all.”

However Lawson mentioned jail time was important because the kind of case has modified. Whereas in years past, most cases concerned individuals voting in two states as a result of they both lived in or had property in each states, within the 2020 election people had purchased into Trump’s claims of widespread voter fraud.

“What we’re listening to is voter fraud is on the market,” Lawson advised the choose. “And basically what we’re seeing here is someone who says ‘Effectively, I’m going to commit voter fraud because it’s a big downside and I’m just going to slide in beneath the radar. And I’m going to do it because all people 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 perspective you hear in the interview is the attitude that differentiates this case from the other cases.”

LaBianca mentioned 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 were evidence that this crime was on the rise, and that heightened deterrence may be called for, the courtroom would possibly order jail time,” LaBianca stated. “However the file right here doesn't show that this crime is on the rise.

“And abhorrent as it could be for someone like the defendant to attack the legitimacy of our free elections with none proof, besides your personal fraud, such statements aren't illegal so far as I know,” the decide continued.