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

PHOENIX (AP) — A decide in Phoenix on Friday sentenced a girl o two years of felony probation, fines and group service for voting her dead mom’s poll in Arizona in the 2020 basic election.

But the decide rejected a prosecutor’s request that she serve at the least 30 days in jail because she lied to investigators and demanded that they maintain these committing voter fraud accountable.

The case in opposition to Tracey Kay McKee, 64, is one in every of just a handful of voter fraud cases from Arizona’s 2020 election that have led to costs, despite 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 Judge Margaret LaBianca before the decide handed down her sentence. McKee mentioned that she was grieving over the lack of her mother and had no intent to influence the result of the election.

“Your Honor, I would like to apologize,” McKee advised LaBianca. “I don’t want to make the excuse for my conduct. What I did was fallacious and I’m prepared to accept the results handed down by the court docket.”

Each McKee and her mother, Mary Arendt, were 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 Legal professional General Todd Lawson performed a tape of McKee being interviewed by an investigator with his workplace the place she said there was rampant voter fraud and denied that she had signed and returned her mother’s ballot.

“The one strategy to prevent voter fraud is to physically go in and punch a poll,” McKee instructed the investigator. “I mean, voter fraud is going to be prevalent as long as there’s mail-in voting, for sure. I mean, there’s no method to make sure a good election.

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

Tom Henze, McKee’s legal professional, pointed to dozens of cases of voter fraud prosecuted in Arizona over the past decade, many for comparable violations of voting someone else’s ballot, and said nobody acquired jail time in these instances. He mentioned agreeing with Lawson that McKee ought to do 30 days jail time would elevate constitutional issues of equity.

“Merely stated, over an extended time frame, in voluminous circumstances, 67 instances, no one on this state for related cases, in similar context ... nobody got jail time,” Henze mentioned. “The courtroom didn’t impose jail time at all.”

However Lawson mentioned jail time was essential because the type of case has changed. Whereas in years previous, most cases involved folks voting in two states as a result of they both lived in or had property in both states, within the 2020 election folks 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 essentially what we’re seeing right here is somebody 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 under the radar. And I’m going to do it as a result of everyone else is doing it and I can get away with it.’

“I don’t subscribe to that in any respect,” he mentioned. “And I believe the angle you hear within the interview is the attitude that differentiates this case from the opposite circumstances.”

LaBianca said that whereas she agreed with Lawson, ordering jail time would give McKee what she advised 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 could also be known as for, the court would possibly order jail time,” LaBianca mentioned. “But the record right here does not show that this crime is on the rise.

“And abhorrent as it may be for someone just like the defendant to attack the legitimacy of our free elections without any proof, besides your individual fraud, such statements are usually not unlawful as far as I know,” the decide continued.