Judge says either DA Fani Willis or prosecutor Nathan Wade must step down in Georgia election case - ABC News
By: ABC News
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
"Dismissal of the indictment is not the appropriate remedy," he said.
ByOlivia Rubin and Lucien BruggemanMarch 15, 2024, 9:52 AM
The judge overseeing the Georgia election interference case against former President Donald Trump and his co-defendants has declined to outright disqualify Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, but ruled that either she or prosecutor Nathan Wade must step aside from the case.
In a 23-page ruling, Judge Scott McAfee wrote that while "dismissal of the indictment is not the appropriate remedy," he concluded that "the established record now highlights a significant appearance of impropriety that infects the current structure of the prosecution team."
McAfee ordered that the conflict described by the defendants presents "an appearance that must be removed through the State's selection of one of two options."
MORE: Attorney leading effort to disqualify DA Fani Willis tells legislators how she uncovered allegations of misconduct
"The District Attorney may choose to step aside, along with the whole of her office, and refer the prosecution to the Prosecuting Attorneys' Council for reassignment," McAfee wrote.
"Alternatively, SADA Wade can withdraw, allowing the District Attorney, the Defendants, and the public to move forward without his presence or remuneration distracting from and potentially compromising the merits of this case."
In justifying his decision, McAfee found that defendants "failed to meet their burden of proving that the District Attorney acquired an actual conflict of interest" -- the standard by which McAfee apparently measured his ruling.
Trump's lead attorney in the Georgia case, Steve Sadow, said in a statement, "We will use all legal options available as we continue to fight to end this case."
Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis looks on during a hearing on the Georgia election interference case, March, 1, 2024, in Atlanta.Alex Slitz/AP, FILE
"While respecting the Court's decision, we believe that the Court did not afford appropriate significance to the prosecutorial misconduct of Willis and Wade, including the financial benefits, testifying untruthfully about when their personal relationship began, as well as Willis' extrajudicial MLK 'church speech,' where she played the race card and falsely accused the defendants and their counsel of racism," Sadow said.
A key element of the defense's case was showing that Willis deliberately prolonged the case to further enrich Wade, who was being paid hourly. McAfee fully disagreed with their argument.
"But in fact, there is no indication the District Attorney is interested in delaying anything. Indeed, the record is quite to the contrary," he wrote.
"The District Attorney has not in any way acted in conformance with the theory that she arranged a financial scheme to enrich herself (or endear herself to Wade) by extending the duration of this prosecution or engaging in excessive litigation," McAfee wrote.
Despite this, McAfee judged Wade's testimony to be "patently unpersuasive," which McAfee said "indicates a willingness on his part to wrongly conceal his relationship with the District Attorney."
"An outsider could reasonably think that the District Attorney is not exercising her independent professional judgment totally free of any compromising influences," McAfee wrote. "As long as Wade remains on the case, this unnecessary perception will persist."
Wade's testimony, McAfee wrote, left the investigation "encumbered by an appearance of impropriety."
The defense's case for disqualification hinged in large part on the timing of Wade and Willis' relationship. If it began before Wade's appointment as special counsel, the defense argued, then it would demonstrate a clear financial conflict.
Of this debate -- which became a centerpiece of Willis' emotional testimony -- McAfee wrote: "Neither side was able to conclusively establish by a preponderance of the evidence when the relationship evolved into a romantic one."
Nevertheless, wrote the judge, "an odor of mendacity remains."
The defense, including Sadow, also argued that Willis committed forensic misconduct by "stoking racial and religious prejudice" against the defendants with a speech she made at church following the allegations, in which she said the allegations were motivated by race.
McAfee wrote that he "cannot find that this speech crossed the line to the point where the Defendants have been denied the opportunity for a fundamentally fair trial, or that it requires the District Attorney's disqualification."
But he still took Willis to task for it, writing that its effect "was to cast racial aspersions at an indicted Defendant's decision to file this pretrial motion."
Even though it may not have "crossed the line," as McAfee wrote, "it was still legally improper."
"Providing this type of public comment creates dangerous waters for the District Attorney to wade further into," McAfee wrote. "The time may well have arrived for an order preventing the State from mentioning the case in any public forum to prevent prejudicial pretrial publicity, but that is not the motion presently before the Court."
Ultimately, wrote McAfee, "it is the undersigned's opinion that Georgia law does not permit the finding of an actual conflict for simply making bad choices -- even repeatedly -- and it is the trial court's duty to confine itself to the relevant issues and applicable law properly brought before it."
The highly anticipated ruling follows a contentious, monthslong disqualification effort spearheaded by Trump and his co-defendants over allegations of misconduct against Willis, which she has fiercely denied.
Trump co-defendant Michael Roman and several other defendants first sought Willis' disqualification from the election case over allegations that she benefited financially from her romantic relationship with prosecutor Nathan Wade, who she hired for the case, through vacations they took that were often booked on his credit card.
Special prosecutor Nathan Wade sits in court, March 1, 2024, in Atlanta.Alex Slitz/Pool via Reuters, FILE
Willis and Wade admitted to the relationship, but said it "does not amount to a disqualifying conflict of interest" and that the relationship "has never involved direct or indirect financial benefit to District Attorney Willis." The DA testified that she often paid Wade back in cash for trips they took.
McAfee held several days of hearings to probe the allegations, during which both Willis and Wade took the stand to deliver emotional testimony.
"You're confused. You think I'm on trial," Willis said to Ashleigh Merchant, the defense attorney questioning her. "These people are on trial for trying to steal an election in 2020."
"I'm not on trial, no matter how hard you try to put me on trial," Willis said.
Outside of allegations of financial misconduct, a debate later emerged over the exact timeline of their romantic relationship. Trump's attorney said both Willis and Wade were "not truthful" when they testified that the relationship began in 2022, after Wade was hired in 2021, urging the judge to disqualify them based on that testimony alone.
"Now, do you have to find that Wade and Willis lied? No," said Trump's attorney, Steve Sadow, during his closing argument in the evidentiary hearing. "What you need to be able to find is that that is a concern, a legitimate concern, based on the evidence in this case about their truthfulness."
"A legitimate concern about the truthfulness, which equates to an appearance of impropriety," Sadow said.
Multiple defendants alleged the relationship began before Wade was hired, including a former employee in the DA's office, Robin Yeartie.
MORE: Timeline: Criminal probe into Trump's efforts to overturn Georgia election results
Willis' office dismissed the defendants' overall disqualification efforts as "absurd" and said there was "absolutely no evidence that [Willis] received any financial gain or benefit." They insisted that in order to disqualify her, the law requires the judge to find evidence of a conflict of interest or forensic misconduct.
"No prosecutor in this state has ever been disqualified on the appearance of a conflict," a filing from her office after the hearings stated.
The defendants had argued differently, saying Willis could be dismissed based solely on the appearance of a conflict of interest.
"While the State claims that no prosecutor has ever been disqualified in Georgia for forensic misconduct, no prosecutor in Georgia, elected or otherwise, has engaged in misconduct like Willis and Wade have here," Sadow said in a filing.
"I want to make clear to the court that the law in Georgia suggests and is very clear that we can demonstrate an appearance of a conflict of interest and that is sufficient," said defense attorney John Merchant, who represents Roman.
Trump and 18 others pleaded not guilty last August to all charges in a sweeping racketeering indictment for alleged efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election in the state of Georgia.
Defendants Kenneth Chesebro, Sidney Powell, Jenna Ellis and Scott Hall subsequently took plea deals in exchange for agreeing to testify against other defendants.
The former president has dismissed the district attorney's investigation as being politically motivated.
Trolling, taunting, spamming, and off topic comments may be removed at the discretion of group mods. NT members that vote up their own comments, repeat comments, or continue to disrupt the conversation risk having all of their comments deleted. Please remember to quote the person(s) to whom you are replying to preserve continuity of this seed.
No Fascism References, Memes, Source Dissing.
Tags
Who is online
413 visitors
Gee I think I'll put my money on the overzealous Willis wanting to stay for personal reasons and world recognition. Sad thing is, now she will be pissed. If he stays, he will be pissed and extra pissed to prove himself to her and the world.
Replacing the prosecutor is a much simpler and much quicker option. I don't know why anyone would think otherwise. And it doesn't really matter if Willis is pissed or not. She still has to prove her case with the evidence she has.
Agreed
They either both should be gone or neither, the "case" is not the issue it's her behavior!
It's a moot point now, isn't it? Can we move on yet?
We've already seen that the left is more than willing to overlook inappropriate behavior.
That's a given. For a "D" then suddenly they are blind. For an "R", they spring into shrieking harpy mode.
Says "the right" who is ignoring Trump's criminal behavior...
None has been proven in a criminal court. When you do that then we can talk.
Oh OK.....Biden "Steals" classified documents and knowingly shares them with a ghost writer who then destroys them...no charges.
Well, he has been adjudged for committing rape (sexual assault), but I am sure you are ignoring that one. And his foundation has been forced to close, but I am sure you will ignore that also. Plus there is Trump university, that is also on ignore.
However we are talking behavior, not crimes. You can "behave" in a certain manner without a court order.
Not in a CRIMINAL COURT. Standard of proof is significantly lower in a civil court. Keep up.
That is the best argument you have? A judge found him to have committed sexual assault and your only rebuttal is that it wasn't in a criminal trial??? He is still an adjudged rapist.
A judge found him LIABLE. Not guilty. You need to understand the differences before trying to talk about it.
Semantics. Finding him LIABLE means that he has found that Trump DID engage in that activity. Therefore guilty of engaging in the sexual assault.
The term "guilt" is not limited to criminal trials.
Dude, you could have just said you don't understand the difference between being found Liable and being found Guilty. Instead you continue with your lack of knowledge and double down on an absolute lie.
Here, maybe you'll get a grip on the understanding between liable and guilty.
Actually it is.
See 1.1.18.
[ deleted ] You can have "guilty" thoughts without having been found "guilty" of actually doing anything in a court of law.
guilt·y
/ˈɡiltē/
adjective
adjective: guilty; comparative adjective: guiltier; superlative adjective: guiltiest
culpable of or responsible for a specified wrongdoing.
[ ]
guilty
adjective
ˈgil-tē
guiltier; guiltiest
Synonyms of guilty
1
: justly chargeable with or responsible for a usually grave breach of conduct or a crime
Does the defendant plead guilty or not guilty?
2
a
: suggesting or involving guilt
The children exchanged guilty looks.
b
: aware of or suffering from guilt
guilty consciences
guilty
[ gil-tee ]
adjective,guilt·i·er, guilt·i·est.
having committed an offense, crime, violation, or wrong, especially against moral or penal law; justly subject to a certain accusation or penalty; culpable:
The jury found her guilty of murder.
characterized by, connected with, or involving guilt:
guilty intent.
Wow, so you looked up guilty in relations to criminal trials and ignored everything else. Congratulations on an amazingly poor attempt of rebuttal.
See 1.1.22 I provided 3 different definitions for you.
Once again when talking about legal definitions you deflect to a dictionary, you are wrong. Period!
Using your loose definitions Biden is guilty of rape, child abuse and pedophilia.
Who limited it to "legal" definitions? Apparently just you.
My loose definitions as defined by Meriam-Webster? Those "loose" definitions???
Well your side of the aisle proclaimed that Hillary was guilty and should be locked up, [ deleted ]
[DELETED]
See 1.1.18 .
Judge clarifies: Yes, Trump was found to have raped E. Jean Carroll
[ [x] ]
AWESOME!
Yeah, but he didn't like my mic drop gif.
She is not only pissed, she is tainted as is her case and the entire Fulton County Judicial system. Judge Scott McAfee is running for re-election in "Fulton County" and he acted accordingly. She lied to the Court and kept her license. Whatever she does now will be questioned.
This opens the door to question ALL of her trials. If she lied about this, what else has she lied about in order to get the desired outcome?
It just hit me. Why have they not filed perjury charges yet?
Let's see, you have a white judge running for reelection in Fulton County GA and other agencies that could go down that road.
He did allow the Trump lawyers to appeal it.
I don't care who prosecutes trump, just get it going
Lol
Either one will be tainted in the jury’s eyes.
Why? Why would the jury have any part of internal policies not related to the crime they are sitting in on?
Prosecutors want the jury’s confidence in their integrity. Besides the appearance of impropriety, the show Willis put on may cause some jurors to question her character.
Yep, have to wonder how this is going to play out in the trial. And how it will impact any appeal should anyone be found guilty. Big can of worms IMO.
Yup, any relationship has nothing to do with the crimes, the many crimes, the former 'president' is guilty as sin of.
But Trump deflection.
Absolutely, it will also delay this trial perhaps until next year.
Are they doing the policy arguments in front of the jury who would have no say in it, since it does not relate to the case they were brought in for?
FYI When you lie on the witness stand it's a crime!
It's Fulton County, you know, where "the water pipe supposedly broke!"
how is it a former 'president' deflection when the 'article' is about it?
The article is about Fani Willis and Nathan Wade.
and about the trial of the former 'president'
'the judge in the Georgia election case of the former 'president'
Insignificant to the MAIN topic. Merely a descriptor of THEIR jobs
[✘]
Any relationship she had makes absolutely no difference. Delay tactics only.
Tell it to the judge.............
If it makes no difference then why have they been told that one must step down?
The judge to her, “This finding is by no means an indication that the Court condones this tremendous lapse in judgment or the unprofessional manner of the District Attorney’s testimony during the evidentiary hearing.”
McAfee also said he remains uncertain that Willis and Wade truthfully testified saying that “an odor of mendacity remains.”
[DELETED]
Screw due process and equal application under the law.
What matters here is that they hurry up and get Trump convicted.
So just drop the pretense of even trying to look fair or impartial.
This is what, attempt number 5 or 6 right?
Ya, we know!
odd that it’s okay for one liar to act as the persecutor, but not two. I don’t get the reasoning. Should be both are disqualified or neither are.
Him being disqualified was actually a plus for Willis. He wasn't qualified to prosecute anyone.
No matter how you look at this, the integrity and entirety of the case is in question.
Doesn't matter to those that suffer from TDS.
They don't even care anymore about even maintaining the facade of impartiality, due process, or equal application under the law.
Democrats have turned our justice system into that of a banana republic.
And the left are actually dumb enough to think they are doing the right thing.
The trail schedule goes to hell now, it may have to wait until the others are completed.
They have to regroup to see what they can (if anything) salvage
You are absolutely right! The lefties on the other hand, don't care how foul it looks.
Headline: "The judge refused to remove Fani Willis from her cases against Trump for election interference and related criminal conspiracies"...
Link or it is a lie. There is no such headline.
It's a lie. (Not that I'd expect anything different)
No, not a lie! Just a fact, and 100% truthful!
No that is a fucking bogus headline that you posted and your link collaborates that fact.
That was easy.
Not the headline you touted in #5. Keep peddling the bullshit.
He was running for re-election in FUCKING FULTON COUNTY!
TRUTH!