Lady avoids jail for voting dead 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 mother’s poll in Arizona in the 2020 general election.

However the decide rejected a prosecutor’s request that she serve not less than 30 days in jail because she lied to investigators and demanded that they maintain those committing voter fraud accountable.

The case against Tracey Kay McKee, 64, is one in every of only a handful of voter fraud instances from Arizona’s 2020 election which have led to expenses, 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 Courtroom Choose Margaret LaBianca earlier than the choose handed down her sentence. McKee said that she was grieving over the loss of her mom and had no intent to impact the end result of the election.

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

Both McKee and her mother, Mary Arendt, were 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 played a tape of McKee being interviewed by an investigator together with his workplace the place she stated there was rampant voter fraud and denied that she had signed and returned her mom’s ballot.

“The one strategy to prevent voter fraud is to bodily go in and punch a ballot,” McKee informed the investigator. “I imply, voter fraud goes to be prevalent as long as there’s mail-in voting, for sure. I imply, there’s no means to make sure a good election.

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

Tom Henze, McKee’s legal professional, pointed to dozens of circumstances of voter fraud prosecuted in Arizona over the past decade, many for similar violations of voting another person’s ballot, and said no one bought jail time in these instances. He stated agreeing with Lawson that McKee ought to do 30 days jail time would raise constitutional issues of equity.

“Merely acknowledged, over an extended time frame, in voluminous cases, 67 cases, no one on this state for similar cases, in similar 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 type of case has modified. While in years past, most circumstances concerned folks 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 listening to is voter fraud is out there,” Lawson advised the judge. “And basically what we’re seeing here is somebody who says ‘Nicely, I’m going to commit voter fraud because it’s a giant drawback and I’m simply going to slip in below 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 said. “And I think the attitude you hear in the interview is the angle that differentiates this case from the other circumstances.”

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

“And if there have been evidence that this crime was on the rise, and that heightened deterrence may be called for, the court would possibly order jail time,” LaBianca said. “But the document right here does not present that this crime is on the rise.

“And abhorrent as it could be for somebody just like the defendant to assault the legitimacy of our free elections without any proof, besides your personal fraud, such statements are usually not illegal so far as I know,” the choose continued.