Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis made her appearance at a hearing on the Georgia election interference case in Atlanta on Friday, March 1, 2024.
In the ongoing disqualification controversy, a court filing on Friday alleges that Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis and special prosecutor Nathan Wade tampered with a witness and suborned perjury.
In the final stages of the campaign to dismiss the prosecutors from the racketeering (RICO) and election interference case against Donald Trump, a 20-page response has been submitted. The response primarily focuses on advocating for the implementation of specific legal standards.
In the court filing, it is alleged that both the District Attorney and the Special Assistant District Attorney (SADA) not only committed perjury but also engaged in a deliberate effort to tamper with a witness and persuade them to provide false testimony.
Related Coverage:
The provided text has been re-written by Quillbot to maintain the same writing style and format. Please find the re-written paragraph below:
Related Coverage:
The following section provides additional coverage related to the topic at hand.
Atlanta-based defense attorney Christopher Anulewicz filed the brief in Fulton County Superior Court on behalf of co-defendant Robert Cheeley. Cheeley, an Alpharetta-based attorney, stands accused of presenting state legislators with false evidence of electoral fraud following Trump’s defeat to Joe Biden in the 2020 election.
Cheeley bases his allegations of witness tampering and perjury on two key factors. Firstly, he relies on the testimony presented during the four-day hearing that addressed allegations of nepotism and self-dealing before Judge Scott McAfee of Fulton County Superior Court. Secondly, he points to a post-hearing request made by co-defendant David Shafer, the former chair of the Georgia GOP. Prosecutors argue that Shafer played a crucial role in the scheme involving fake electors.
A different witness recounts a phone conversation.
Shafer’s request, as previously reported by Law&Crime, includes the proposal to have Cindi Lee Yeager, a prosecutor in Cobb County, testify.
Yeager’s testimony supports the claims made by Terrence Bradley, Wade’s former divorce lawyer and law partner, about the timeline of the DA’s relationship with the man she appointed to handle the most significant criminal case in Georgia’s history.
Bradley confirmed that the two prosecutors started dating before Willis hired Wade. However, he mentioned that this information was not presented in court. During his sworn testimony, Bradley stated that he was unable to recall certain details about the Willis-Wade relationship, and in some cases, he could only speculate. This included the timeline of when the affair began.
Yeager’s testimony was presented by the defense to challenge crucial elements of Bradley’s testimony. This included questioning the validity of the allegations made about the relationship and disputing Bradley’s interactions with Willis.
The Shafer motion finally emphasized the following points:
In or around September of 2023, Mr. Bradley was visiting Ms. Yeager in her office when Mr. Bradley received a telephone call. Ms. Yeager could hear that the caller was District Attorney Willis. District Attorney Willis was calling Mr. Bradley in response to an article that was published about how much money Mr. Wade and his law partners had been paid in this case. Ms. Yeager heard District Attorney Willis tell Mr. Bradley: “ They are coming after us. You don’t need to talk to them about anything about us.”
Defense attorneys have attempted to argue that Wade has been paid too much for his work and lacks the necessary qualifications for the job he was allegedly hired to do by his then-girlfriend. However, these arguments have not gained much support in McAfee’s courtroom.
The alleged claim made by Yeager about the phone call raises a bigger issue, which is whether Bradley misrepresented his relationship with the district attorney. It is concerning if the district attorney’s office did not correct this information for the court. If the judge finds Yeager to be a credible witness, it could pose a problem for the state’s case. However, Shafer’s motion does not explicitly accuse Willis and Wade of witness tampering.
The alleged phone call between Bradley and Willis reportedly took place more than three months prior to defense attorney Ashleigh Merchant, who represents co-defendant Michael Roman, filing the disqualification motion in early January of this year.
Another phone call
Cheeley’s response also mentions another phone call that was mentioned during Bradley’s testimony. The call took place in mid-February and late February.
According to the Cheeley filing, Bradley testified that he received a call from Gabe Banks, who is not only a friend but also a former Fulton County ADA with Fani Willis. It’s worth noting that Banks’ wife currently works at the District Attorney’s Office. During his testimony, Bradley denied having any personal knowledge of the relationship between the District Attorney and SADA Wade, despite previously sharing such information with Roman’s counsel and Cobb ADA Ms. Yeager.
Bradley shared details about a phone call he received from Gabe Banks, a former prosecutor turned defense attorney, during his testimony.
Merchant was taken by surprise when he received the unexpected phone call. It was related to Bradley’s potential involvement in the disqualification case. The defense had been attempting to prove that Banks made the call on Wade’s behalf and advised Bradley against testifying, but their efforts had been partially successful.
During the questioning, Bradley provided a string of unmemorable and uncertain answers. However, Merchant managed to extract testimony from Bradley regarding his duty to maintain attorney-client privilege. The underlying insinuation was that Bradley should refrain from discussing Wade’s affair with Willis. Despite this, Bradley asserted that he did not perceive the call from Banks as a form of intimidation.
