Lady avoids jail for voting useless mom’s poll in Arizona

PHOENIX (AP) — A judge in Phoenix on Friday sentenced a girl o two years of felony probation, fines and community 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 at the least 30 days in jail because she lied to investigators and demanded that they maintain these committing voter fraud accountable.

The case towards Tracey Kay McKee, 64, is one in every of just a handful of voter fraud instances from Arizona’s 2020 election which have led to costs, regardless of widespread perception amongst 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 Courtroom Judge Margaret LaBianca earlier than the decide handed down her sentence. McKee stated that she was grieving over the lack of her mom and had no intent to affect the end result of the election.

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

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 had been mailed to voters.

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

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

“And I don’t consider 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 cases of voter fraud prosecuted in Arizona over the past decade, many for related violations of voting another person’s ballot, and mentioned nobody acquired jail time in those cases. He mentioned agreeing with Lawson that McKee should do 30 days jail time would increase constitutional problems with equity.

“Merely said, over a long time frame, in voluminous instances, 67 cases, nobody on this state for comparable circumstances, in similar context ... nobody got jail time,” Henze stated. “The court docket didn’t impose jail time at all.”

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

“What we’re listening to is voter fraud is out there,” Lawson advised the judge. “And primarily what we’re seeing right here is someone who says ‘Effectively, I’m going to commit voter fraud because it’s a giant problem and I’m just 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 feel the angle you hear in the interview is the angle that differentiates this case from the other circumstances.”

LaBianca mentioned that while she agreed with Lawson, ordering jail time would give McKee what she instructed the investigator what she needed: going after individuals who dedicated voter fraud.

“And if there were proof that this crime was on the rise, and that heightened deterrence could also be called for, the courtroom would possibly order jail time,” LaBianca stated. “But the report right here doesn't show that this crime is on the rise.

“And abhorrent as it may be for someone like the defendant to attack the legitimacy of our free elections without any proof, besides your individual fraud, such statements should not illegal so far as I know,” the decide continued.