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

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

However the decide rejected a prosecutor’s request that she serve at the very 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 against Tracey Kay McKee, 64, is considered one of just a handful of voter fraud cases from Arizona’s 2020 election that have led to fees, regardless of widespread belief 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 Decide Margaret LaBianca before the choose handed down her sentence. McKee mentioned that she was grieving over the loss of her mom and had no intent to influence the result of the election.

“Your Honor, I would like to apologize,” McKee instructed LaBianca. “I don’t need to make the excuse for my behavior. What I did was wrong and I’m ready to just accept the consequences handed down by the courtroom.”

Both McKee and her mom, Mary Arendt, have been registered Republicans, although 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 Normal Todd Lawson played a tape of McKee being interviewed by an investigator together with his office the place she stated there was rampant voter fraud and denied that she had signed and returned her mom’s poll.

“The only strategy to stop voter fraud is to bodily go in and punch a ballot,” McKee informed the investigator. “I mean, voter fraud goes to be prevalent so long as there’s mail-in voting, for certain. I imply, there’s no manner to make sure a fair election.

“And I don’t imagine that this was a fair election,” she continued. “I do consider 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 past decade, many for related violations of voting someone else’s poll, and mentioned nobody obtained jail time in those circumstances. He mentioned agreeing with Lawson that McKee ought to do 30 days jail time would increase constitutional issues of fairness.

“Simply acknowledged, over a protracted period of time, in voluminous instances, 67 instances, no one in this state for similar circumstances, in comparable context ... no one acquired jail time,” Henze stated. “The court docket didn’t impose jail time in any respect.”

However Lawson stated jail time was necessary because the kind of case has modified. While in years previous, most instances concerned people voting in two states because they either lived in or had property in both states, within the 2020 election individuals had purchased into Trump’s claims of widespread voter fraud.

“What we’re hearing is voter fraud is out there,” Lawson instructed the decide. “And primarily what we’re seeing here is someone who says ‘Nicely, I’m going to commit voter fraud because it’s a giant drawback and I’m simply going to slide in underneath 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 perspective you hear in the interview is the angle that differentiates this case from the opposite cases.”

LaBianca stated that while she agreed with Lawson, ordering jail time would give McKee what she told the investigator what she wanted: going after individuals who committed voter fraud.

“And if there have been proof that this crime was on the rise, and that heightened deterrence may be known as for, the court might order jail time,” LaBianca stated. “However the file here doesn't show that this crime is on the rise.

“And abhorrent as it may be for somebody just like the defendant to assault the legitimacy of our free elections without any evidence, besides your individual fraud, such statements should not unlawful as far as I do know,” the judge continued.