Woman avoids jail for voting useless mother’s ballot in Arizona

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

However the choose rejected a prosecutor’s request that she serve not less than 30 days in jail because she lied to investigators and demanded that they hold those committing voter fraud accountable.

The case in opposition to Tracey Kay McKee, 64, is one in every of only a handful of voter fraud instances from Arizona’s 2020 election that have led to charges, despite widespread belief among 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 docket Decide Margaret LaBianca before the choose handed down her sentence. McKee mentioned that she was grieving over the loss of her mother and had no intent to impression the end result of the election.

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

Both McKee and her mom, 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 have been mailed to voters.

Assistant Lawyer Normal Todd Lawson performed a tape of McKee being interviewed by an investigator together with his office where she said there was rampant voter fraud and denied that she had signed and returned her mother’s poll.

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

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

Tom Henze, McKee’s lawyer, pointed to dozens of cases of voter fraud prosecuted in Arizona over the previous decade, many for related violations of voting another person’s poll, and said no one bought jail time in those cases. He said agreeing with Lawson that McKee ought to do 30 days jail time would raise constitutional issues of equity.

“Simply acknowledged, over a protracted time period, in voluminous circumstances, 67 instances, nobody on this state for related cases, in related context ... nobody acquired jail time,” Henze stated. “The court docket didn’t impose jail time in any respect.”

But Lawson mentioned jail time was important because the kind of case has changed. While in years past, most cases involved people voting in two states as a result of they either 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 hearing is voter fraud is out there,” Lawson advised the choose. “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 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 said. “And I think the attitude you hear within the interview is the angle that differentiates this case from the opposite circumstances.”

LaBianca said that whereas she agreed with Lawson, ordering jail time would give McKee what she instructed the investigator what she wanted: going after people who committed voter fraud.

“And if there have been evidence that this crime was on the rise, and that heightened deterrence may be referred to as for, the courtroom may order jail time,” LaBianca said. “But the file here doesn't show that this crime is on the rise.

“And abhorrent as it could be for somebody just like the defendant to attack the legitimacy of our free elections with none proof, except your individual fraud, such statements are usually not illegal as far as I do know,” the choose continued.