Girl avoids jail for voting lifeless mother’s ballot 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 lifeless mother’s ballot in Arizona within the 2020 common election.

But the judge 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 maintain those committing voter fraud accountable.

The case towards 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 expenses, despite 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 however now lives in California, sobbed as she apologized to Maricopa County Superior Court Decide 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 influence the end result of the election.

“Your Honor, I would like to apologize,” McKee informed LaBianca. “I don’t need to make the excuse for my habits. What I did was unsuitable and I’m prepared to simply accept the results handed down by the court.”

Each McKee and her mom, Mary Arendt, were registered Republicans, though 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 Lawyer Basic 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 ballot.

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

“And I don’t believe 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 instances of voter fraud prosecuted in Arizona over the previous decade, many for comparable violations of voting another person’s ballot, and stated nobody obtained jail time in these instances. He stated agreeing with Lawson that McKee should do 30 days jail time would increase constitutional problems with equity.

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

But Lawson said jail time was vital as a result of the type of case has changed. While in years past, most cases concerned folks voting in two states because they both lived in or had property in both states, in the 2020 election individuals had bought into Trump’s claims of widespread voter fraud.

“What we’re listening to is voter fraud is on the market,” Lawson told the judge. “And primarily what we’re seeing right here is somebody who says ‘Nicely, I’m going to commit voter fraud as a result of it’s a big downside and I’m just going to slip in beneath the radar. And I’m going to do it because everybody else is doing it and I can get away with it.’

“I don’t subscribe to that in any respect,” he said. “And I think the angle you hear within the interview is the attitude that differentiates this case from the other cases.”

LaBianca said that while she agreed with Lawson, ordering jail time would give McKee what she told the investigator what she needed: going after individuals who committed voter fraud.

“And if there have been 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 stated. “But the document here does not present that this crime is on the rise.

“And abhorrent as it might be for someone like the defendant to attack the legitimacy of our free elections with none proof, besides your personal fraud, such statements aren't unlawful so far as I know,” the choose continued.