Girl avoids jail for voting dead mother’s ballot 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 dead mom’s poll in Arizona in the 2020 basic election.

But the decide rejected a prosecutor’s request that she serve not less than 30 days in jail as a result of 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 among just a handful of voter fraud circumstances from Arizona’s 2020 election which have led to fees, 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 Choose Margaret LaBianca before the decide handed down her sentence. McKee said that she was grieving over the lack of her mom and had no intent to impression the end result of the election.

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

Both McKee and her mother, Mary Arendt, had been 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 Lawyer General Todd Lawson performed a tape of McKee being interviewed by an investigator with his office where she mentioned there was rampant voter fraud and denied that she had signed and returned her mother’s ballot.

“The only technique to forestall voter fraud is to physically go in and punch a ballot,” McKee informed the investigator. “I mean, voter fraud is going to be prevalent as long as there’s mail-in voting, for certain. I mean, there’s no approach to make sure a good election.

“And I don’t imagine that this was a good election,” she continued. “I do imagine there was numerous 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 someone else’s poll, and said nobody received jail time in those circumstances. He stated agreeing with Lawson that McKee ought to do 30 days jail time would elevate constitutional problems with equity.

“Simply stated, over a protracted period of time, in voluminous circumstances, 67 cases, no one on this state for similar instances, in related context ... no person got jail time,” Henze said. “The court docket didn’t impose jail time in any respect.”

But Lawson mentioned jail time was important because the kind of case has modified. While in years previous, most instances concerned folks voting in two states as a result of they both lived in or had property in each states, in the 2020 election people had bought into Trump’s claims of widespread voter fraud.

“What we’re listening to is voter fraud is on the market,” Lawson informed the decide. “And primarily what we’re seeing right here is someone who says ‘Well, I’m going to commit voter fraud as a result of it’s a big downside and I’m simply going to slide 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 perspective you hear in the interview is the attitude that differentiates this case from the opposite circumstances.”

LaBianca mentioned that whereas she agreed with Lawson, ordering jail time would give McKee what she instructed the investigator what she needed: going after people who dedicated 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 courtroom might order jail time,” LaBianca stated. “But the record right here does not present that this crime is on the rise.

“And abhorrent as it might be for somebody just like the defendant to assault the legitimacy of our free elections with none proof, except your own fraud, such statements are usually not illegal so far as I know,” the choose continued.