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

PHOENIX (AP) — A choose in Phoenix on Friday sentenced a girl o two years of felony probation, fines and community service for voting her useless mom’s ballot in Arizona in the 2020 general election.

But the judge rejected a prosecutor’s request that she serve at the least 30 days in jail as a result of she lied to investigators and demanded that they hold these committing voter fraud accountable.

The case against Tracey Kay McKee, 64, is one among only a handful of voter fraud instances from Arizona’s 2020 election that have led to expenses, 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 but now lives in California, sobbed as she apologized to Maricopa County Superior Court Choose Margaret LaBianca before the decide handed down her sentence. McKee mentioned that she was grieving over the loss of her mom and had no intent to impression the result of the election.

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

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

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

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

“And I don’t consider that this was a fair election,” she continued. “I do believe there was numerous 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 ballot, and stated nobody obtained jail time in those cases. He stated agreeing with Lawson that McKee ought to do 30 days jail time would increase constitutional problems with fairness.

“Simply stated, over an extended period of time, in voluminous circumstances, 67 instances, no person in this state for similar circumstances, in similar context ... nobody obtained jail time,” Henze stated. “The court didn’t impose jail time at all.”

But Lawson mentioned jail time was essential because the type of case has modified. While in years previous, most circumstances concerned individuals voting in two states because they both lived in or had property in each states, within the 2020 election people had bought into Trump’s claims of widespread voter fraud.

“What we’re hearing is voter fraud is out there,” Lawson informed the decide. “And primarily what we’re seeing here is someone who says ‘Nicely, I’m going to commit voter fraud because it’s an enormous problem and I’m simply going to slip in under the radar. And I’m going to do it as a result of all people else is doing it and I can get away with it.’

“I don’t subscribe to that at all,” he mentioned. “And I believe the attitude you hear within the interview is the attitude that differentiates this case from the other circumstances.”

LaBianca said that while she agreed with Lawson, ordering jail time would give McKee what she advised 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 known as for, the court would possibly order jail time,” LaBianca mentioned. “However the record here doesn't show 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 with none evidence, besides your individual fraud, such statements aren't illegal so far as I know,” the judge continued.