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

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

But the decide rejected a prosecutor’s request that she serve at least 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 of only a handful of voter fraud cases from Arizona’s 2020 election that have led to fees, despite widespread perception among 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 decide handed down her sentence. McKee said that she was grieving over the loss of her mom and had no intent to impression the outcome of the election.

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

Both McKee and her mother, Mary Arendt, were registered Republicans, though she was not requested if she voted for Trump. Arendt died on Oct. 5, 2020, two days before early ballots were mailed to voters.

Assistant Legal professional General Todd Lawson played a tape of McKee being interviewed by an investigator together with his workplace where she mentioned there was rampant voter fraud and denied that she had signed and returned her mother’s ballot.

“The one option to prevent voter fraud is to physically go in and punch a poll,” McKee advised the investigator. “I mean, voter fraud goes to be prevalent as long as there’s mail-in voting, for positive. 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 imagine there was loads of voter fraud.”

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

“Merely said, over a long period of time, in voluminous instances, 67 cases, no person in this state for related cases, in related context ... no one bought jail time,” Henze stated. “The court didn’t impose jail time in any respect.”

However Lawson mentioned jail time was essential because the kind of case has changed. Whereas in years past, most circumstances involved individuals voting in two states because they both lived in or had property in both states, in the 2020 election individuals had purchased into Trump’s claims of widespread voter fraud.

“What we’re listening to is voter fraud is on the market,” Lawson informed the decide. “And basically what we’re seeing here is someone who says ‘Nicely, I’m going to commit voter fraud as a result of it’s a big problem and I’m just going to slide 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 at all,” he said. “And I believe the perspective you hear within the interview is the perspective that differentiates this case from the opposite instances.”

LaBianca said that whereas she agreed with Lawson, ordering jail time would give McKee what she told the investigator what she wanted: going after people 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 court docket would possibly order jail time,” LaBianca stated. “However the file here does not present that this crime is on the rise.

“And abhorrent as it might be for someone like the defendant to assault the legitimacy of our free elections without any proof, except your individual fraud, such statements usually are not illegal as far as I do know,” the choose continued.