Woman avoids jail for voting lifeless mother’s ballot in Arizona

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

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

The case in opposition to Tracey Kay McKee, 64, is one in all just a handful of voter fraud circumstances 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 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 Decide Margaret LaBianca before the judge handed down her sentence. McKee stated that she was grieving over the loss of her mother and had no intent to impression the result of the election.

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

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

Assistant Attorney Basic Todd Lawson performed 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 mom’s poll.

“The only way to prevent voter fraud is to physically go in and punch a ballot,” McKee informed the investigator. “I imply, voter fraud goes to be prevalent so 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 believe that this was a fair election,” she continued. “I do believe there was numerous voter fraud.”

Tom Henze, McKee’s attorney, pointed to dozens of instances of voter fraud prosecuted in Arizona over the previous decade, many for related violations of voting someone else’s ballot, and said no one received jail time in those cases. He said agreeing with Lawson that McKee should do 30 days jail time would elevate constitutional problems with equity.

“Merely said, over a long time frame, in voluminous circumstances, 67 instances, nobody on this state for comparable cases, in comparable context ... nobody acquired jail time,” Henze stated. “The courtroom didn’t impose jail time at all.”

However Lawson stated jail time was necessary because the type of case has modified. While in years previous, most circumstances involved folks voting in two states because they either lived in or had property in each states, within the 2020 election folks had purchased into Trump’s claims of widespread voter fraud.

“What we’re hearing is voter fraud is on the market,” Lawson advised the judge. “And essentially what we’re seeing right here is somebody who says ‘Properly, I’m going to commit voter fraud because it’s a giant downside and I’m simply going to slide in underneath the radar. And I’m going to do it because all people else is doing it and I can get away with it.’

“I don’t subscribe to that at all,” he said. “And I think the attitude you hear in the interview is the perspective that differentiates this case from the other circumstances.”

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

“And if there were proof that this crime was on the rise, and that heightened deterrence could also be referred to as for, the court docket would possibly order jail time,” LaBianca mentioned. “However the record right here doesn't present that this crime is on the rise.

“And abhorrent as it may be for someone like the defendant to attack the legitimacy of our free elections with none proof, except your own fraud, such statements are not illegal as far as I know,” the judge continued.