Girl avoids jail for voting dead mother’s poll in Arizona

PHOENIX (AP) — A choose in Phoenix on Friday sentenced a woman o two years of felony probation, fines and group service for voting her useless mom’s ballot in Arizona in the 2020 normal election.

But the judge rejected a prosecutor’s request that she serve not less than 30 days in jail as a result of she lied to investigators and demanded that they hold these committing voter fraud accountable.

The case towards Tracey Kay McKee, 64, is one in every of only a handful of voter fraud circumstances from Arizona’s 2020 election that have led to costs, 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 other 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 choose handed down her sentence. McKee mentioned that she was grieving over the lack of her mom and had no intent to impression the end result of the election.

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

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

Assistant Attorney Basic Todd Lawson performed a tape of McKee being interviewed by an investigator together 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 one strategy to forestall voter fraud is to physically go in and punch a poll,” McKee told the investigator. “I mean, voter fraud is going to be prevalent as long as there’s mail-in voting, for positive. I imply, there’s no means to ensure a fair election.

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

Tom Henze, McKee’s legal professional, pointed to dozens of instances of voter fraud prosecuted in Arizona over the previous decade, many for related violations of voting someone else’s poll, and mentioned nobody acquired jail time in these circumstances. He mentioned agreeing with Lawson that McKee should do 30 days jail time would increase constitutional issues of equity.

“Simply said, over an extended period of time, in voluminous cases, 67 circumstances, no one in this state for similar instances, in similar context ... no person bought jail time,” Henze mentioned. “The courtroom didn’t impose jail time at all.”

However Lawson said jail time was vital because the type of case has modified. While in years past, most circumstances involved folks voting in two states because they both lived in or had property in both states, within the 2020 election folks had purchased into Trump’s claims of widespread voter fraud.

“What we’re hearing is voter fraud is on the market,” Lawson told the choose. “And essentially what we’re seeing here is someone who says ‘Well, I’m going to commit voter fraud because it’s a giant problem and I’m just going to slide in beneath the radar. And I’m going to do it because everyone else is doing it and I can get away with it.’

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

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

“And if there have been proof that this crime was on the rise, and that heightened deterrence could also be known as for, the court docket would possibly order jail time,” LaBianca said. “However the record right here doesn't show 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 without any proof, except your own fraud, such statements should not illegal so far as I know,” the judge continued.