Lady avoids jail for voting lifeless mother’s ballot in Arizona

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

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

The case in opposition to Tracey Kay McKee, 64, is one in all only a handful of voter fraud circumstances from Arizona’s 2020 election that have led to expenses, 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 however now lives in California, sobbed as she apologized to Maricopa County Superior Court docket Choose Margaret LaBianca before the judge handed down her sentence. McKee said that she was grieving over the lack of her mother and had no intent to impact the end result of the election.

“Your Honor, I would like to apologize,” McKee informed LaBianca. “I don’t wish to make the excuse for my habits. What I did was wrong and I’m ready to just accept the results handed down by the court.”

Each 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 have been mailed to voters.

Assistant Legal professional Basic Todd Lawson performed a tape of McKee being interviewed by an investigator along with his office the place she stated there was rampant voter fraud and denied that she had signed and returned her mother’s ballot.

“The only technique to stop voter fraud is to bodily go in and punch a ballot,” McKee instructed 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 way to make sure a fair election.

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

Tom Henze, McKee’s lawyer, pointed to dozens of circumstances of voter fraud prosecuted in Arizona over the previous decade, many for comparable violations of voting someone else’s ballot, and mentioned no one obtained jail time in those circumstances. He said agreeing with Lawson that McKee ought to do 30 days jail time would raise constitutional issues of fairness.

“Merely acknowledged, over a protracted time frame, in voluminous instances, 67 circumstances, nobody in this state for similar circumstances, in similar context ... no person got jail time,” Henze mentioned. “The courtroom didn’t impose jail time in any respect.”

However Lawson mentioned jail time was vital because the type of case has changed. Whereas in years past, most instances involved folks voting in two states as a result of they both lived in or had property in each states, in the 2020 election folks had purchased into Trump’s claims of widespread voter fraud.

“What we’re hearing is voter fraud is out there,” Lawson informed the choose. “And primarily what we’re seeing here is somebody who says ‘Well, I’m going to commit voter fraud because it’s an enormous drawback and I’m just 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 stated. “And I think the attitude you hear in the interview is the angle that differentiates this case from the opposite circumstances.”

LaBianca stated that whereas she agreed with Lawson, ordering jail time would give McKee what she informed 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 known as for, the court might order jail time,” LaBianca said. “But the file right 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 personal fraud, such statements usually are not unlawful as far as I do know,” the judge continued.