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

PHOENIX (AP) — A decide in Phoenix on Friday sentenced a woman o two years of felony probation, fines and group service for voting her dead mom’s ballot 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 these committing voter fraud accountable.

The case in opposition to Tracey Kay McKee, 64, is one in every of just a handful of voter fraud cases from Arizona’s 2020 election that have led to prices, 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 Court docket Judge Margaret LaBianca earlier than the judge handed down her sentence. McKee mentioned that she was grieving over the loss of her mother and had no intent to impact the end result of the election.

“Your Honor, I want to apologize,” McKee told LaBianca. “I don’t wish to make the excuse for my behavior. What I did was fallacious and I’m prepared to simply accept the implications handed down by the court docket.”

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

Assistant Legal professional Basic Todd Lawson performed a tape of McKee being interviewed by an investigator with his workplace where she stated there was rampant voter fraud and denied that she had signed and returned her mom’s poll.

“The one technique 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 sure. I mean, there’s no manner to ensure a good election.

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

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

“Simply said, over a long period of time, in voluminous cases, 67 cases, no one on this state for similar circumstances, in related context ... nobody acquired jail time,” Henze said. “The court didn’t impose jail time at all.”

However Lawson stated jail time was essential because the type of case has changed. While in years past, most instances concerned people voting in two states as a result of they both lived in or had property in both states, in the 2020 election people had purchased into Trump’s claims of widespread voter fraud.

“What we’re listening to is voter fraud is on the market,” Lawson instructed the choose. “And primarily what we’re seeing here is somebody who says ‘Effectively, I’m going to commit voter fraud because it’s a giant problem and I’m simply going to slip 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 perspective you hear in the interview is the perspective that differentiates this case from the other cases.”

LaBianca stated that while she agreed with Lawson, ordering jail time would give McKee what she instructed 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 may be referred to as for, the court may order jail time,” LaBianca said. “But the record here doesn't show that this crime is on the rise.

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