Lady avoids jail for voting useless mother’s ballot 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 within the 2020 general election.

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

The case against Tracey Kay McKee, 64, is one in all only a handful of voter fraud cases from Arizona’s 2020 election which have led to prices, 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 other battleground states.

McKee, who was from Phoenix suburb of Scottsdale but now lives in California, sobbed as she apologized to Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Margaret LaBianca before the choose handed down her sentence. McKee stated that she was grieving over the lack of her mother and had no intent to impression the outcome of the election.

“Your Honor, I want to apologize,” McKee instructed LaBianca. “I don’t want to make the excuse for my habits. What I did was mistaken and I’m ready to just accept the consequences handed down by the court.”

Each McKee and her mother, Mary Arendt, were registered Republicans, although 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 Normal Todd Lawson performed 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 poll.

“The only way to prevent voter fraud is to bodily go in and punch a ballot,” McKee informed the investigator. “I mean, voter fraud is going to be prevalent so long as there’s mail-in voting, for certain. I mean, there’s no manner to ensure a good election.

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

Tom Henze, McKee’s legal professional, pointed to dozens of instances of voter fraud prosecuted in Arizona over the previous decade, many for similar violations of voting another person’s ballot, and said nobody acquired jail time in those cases. He stated agreeing with Lawson that McKee ought to do 30 days jail time would elevate constitutional problems with fairness.

“Simply stated, over an extended time frame, in voluminous circumstances, 67 cases, nobody on this state for related instances, in related context ... nobody got jail time,” Henze mentioned. “The court didn’t impose jail time in any respect.”

However Lawson said jail time was necessary because the kind of case has modified. Whereas in years previous, most cases involved people voting in two states because they both 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 hearing is voter fraud is out there,” Lawson told the decide. “And basically what we’re seeing here is someone who says ‘Well, I’m going to commit voter fraud because it’s a giant drawback and I’m simply going to slip in beneath the radar. And I’m going to do it as a result of everybody else is doing it and I can get away with it.’

“I don’t subscribe to that in any respect,” he stated. “And I think the perspective you hear in the interview is the angle that differentiates this case from the opposite instances.”

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

“And if there have been 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 file right here does not present that this crime is on the rise.

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