Woman avoids jail for voting useless 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 ballot in Arizona within the 2020 general election.

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

The case towards 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 costs, regardless of widespread perception 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 however now lives in California, sobbed as she apologized to Maricopa County Superior Court docket Judge Margaret LaBianca earlier than the judge handed down her sentence. McKee mentioned that she was grieving over the lack of her mother and had no intent to affect the outcome of the election.

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

Both 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 earlier than early ballots had been mailed to voters.

Assistant Lawyer General 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 mother’s ballot.

“The only way to stop voter fraud is to physically go in and punch a poll,” McKee informed the investigator. “I imply, voter fraud is going to be prevalent so long as there’s mail-in voting, for sure. I mean, there’s no manner to ensure a fair election.

“And I don’t believe that this was a fair election,” she continued. “I do consider there was a variety 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 related violations of voting another person’s poll, and said nobody got jail time in these instances. He stated agreeing with Lawson that McKee should do 30 days jail time would elevate constitutional problems with equity.

“Simply said, over an extended time period, in voluminous circumstances, 67 instances, nobody in this state for related instances, in similar context ... no person received jail time,” Henze said. “The court docket didn’t impose jail time in any respect.”

However Lawson said jail time was vital as a result of the type of case has changed. While in years past, most circumstances concerned individuals voting in two states because they either lived in or had property in each states, in the 2020 election individuals had bought into Trump’s claims of widespread voter fraud.

“What we’re hearing is voter fraud is out there,” Lawson instructed the choose. “And basically what we’re seeing right here is someone who says ‘Effectively, I’m going to commit voter fraud as a result of it’s a big downside and I’m just going to slide in underneath the radar. And I’m going to do it because everybody 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 attitude you hear within the interview is the angle that differentiates this case from the other circumstances.”

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 dedicated voter fraud.

“And if there have been proof that this crime was on the rise, and that heightened deterrence may be referred to as for, the court would possibly order jail time,” LaBianca stated. “But the document here does not show 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 proof, except your own fraud, such statements should not unlawful so far as I do know,” the judge continued.