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

PHOENIX (AP) — A judge in Phoenix on Friday sentenced a woman o two years of felony probation, fines and community service for voting her lifeless mom’s poll in Arizona in the 2020 common election.

However the decide rejected a prosecutor’s request that she serve no less than 30 days in jail because she lied to investigators and demanded that they hold these committing voter fraud accountable.

The case against Tracey Kay McKee, 64, is certainly one of only a handful of voter fraud cases from Arizona’s 2020 election which have led to fees, regardless of widespread perception among 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 however now lives in California, sobbed as she apologized to Maricopa County Superior Court docket Decide Margaret LaBianca before the decide handed down her sentence. McKee said that she was grieving over the loss of her mom and had no intent to influence the result of the election.

“Your Honor, I want to apologize,” McKee advised LaBianca. “I don’t want to make the excuse for my conduct. What I did was flawed and I’m prepared to accept the implications handed down by the courtroom.”

Each 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 had been mailed to voters.

Assistant Lawyer Common Todd Lawson performed a tape of McKee being interviewed by an investigator with his office the place she mentioned there was rampant voter fraud and denied that she had signed and returned her mom’s ballot.

“The only method to prevent voter fraud is to bodily go in and punch a ballot,” McKee advised the investigator. “I mean, voter fraud is going to be prevalent as long as there’s mail-in voting, for positive. I imply, there’s no manner to make sure a fair election.

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

Tom Henze, McKee’s lawyer, pointed to dozens of cases of voter fraud prosecuted in Arizona over the past decade, many for comparable violations of voting another person’s poll, and said no one acquired jail time in those cases. He mentioned agreeing with Lawson that McKee should do 30 days jail time would elevate constitutional issues of fairness.

“Merely stated, over an extended time period, in voluminous instances, 67 cases, no person in this state for comparable instances, in related context ... nobody bought jail time,” Henze mentioned. “The court docket didn’t impose jail time at all.”

However Lawson stated jail time was essential because the type of case has modified. While in years previous, most cases involved folks voting in two states as a result of they either lived in or had property in both states, within the 2020 election individuals had bought into Trump’s claims of widespread voter fraud.

“What we’re hearing is voter fraud is out there,” Lawson informed the judge. “And essentially what we’re seeing here is someone who says ‘Properly, I’m going to commit voter fraud as a result of it’s a big downside 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 within the interview is the attitude that differentiates this case from the other cases.”

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

“And if there were proof 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 report here doesn't show that this crime is on the rise.

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