Atlanta – Both sides in Georgia’s high-profile election interference case involving former President Trump have disqualified Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis because of her personal relationship with Nathan Wade, the special prosecutor in the case. Preparations are underway for final arguments.
After two days of drama-filled hearings on the motion to disqualify Willis, the public is now awaiting the next step.
The first step will be an in-camera hearing between Judge Scott McAfee and the defense’s so-called “star witness” Terrence Bradley. Officials confirmed to Fox News that the hearing is set for Monday, February 26th.
During last Friday’s testimony, Bradley could barely speak as the state’s attorney and his own attorney objected to nearly every question.
The biggest conclusion after two days of intense hearings on the Fanny Willis case: “What’s done is done.”
The debate centered on whether Bradley’s testimony violated attorney-client privilege, since he was at one time Wade’s divorce attorney.
In Georgia, Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis and Special Prosecutor Nathan Wade are in the spotlight. (Getty Images, File)
Georgia State University law professor Anthony Kreis said the little information Bradley was able to share in open court was “basically useless.”
But that could change depending on what is said behind closed doors at future hearings. A judge could decide whether Bradley’s plea actually violates attorney-client privilege and how much weight to give to testimony that is ultimately allowed.
A final hearing will then be scheduled, during which the state and defense will compile evidence and make closing arguments on the matter. Multiple sources told Fox News that this is likely to happen sometime next week, but the exact date has not yet been finalized.
Kreis said there is “no clear precedent” for this case and that “everything depends on what ethical standards Judge McAfee applies.”
Trump-Georgia judge says allegations of ‘inappropriate’ affair with Da Fani Willis ‘could lead to disbarment’
Prosecutors said they wanted the judge to use the standard of an actual conflict that needed to be proven, but the defense argued that any indication of conflict alone was enough to disqualify Willis. .
“I think Judge McAfee is in the really unenviable position of having to go through the law, go through this particular case, and then make a decision accordingly,” Kreis explained.
Judge Scott McAfee at the Fulton County Courthouse in Atlanta on February 15th. (Alyssa Pointer, Getty Images)
The key question is whether Willis and Wade’s relationship appears to pose a conflict of interest in this case, and if there is indeed a conflict, what legal standard does the judge think is correct to use? That’s true.
Kreis said the standard for prosecutors would typically be a specific conflict of interest. He suggested that given the evidence presented in previous hearings, “the prosecutor’s office is unlikely to be forced out of the case” if that is what the judge chooses to do in this case.
Georgia Da Fani Willis won’t testify for second day about ‘inappropriate’ affair with Nathan Wade
Regardless of the outcome, an immediate appeal is very likely, Kreis said.
Under Georgia law, defense attorneys can file what is called a “certificate of examination.” This is essentially a court filing asking the judge if his decision can be appealed. If the judge says yes, his case will go to the Georgia Court of Appeals. If the judge refuses, the defense must wait until the entire trial is over before taking the case to the state Court of Appeals.
Letitia James ‘ready’ to seize President Trump’s assets if he fails to pay $354 million fraud fine
Still, Kreis said, “The Court of Appeals here in Georgia doesn’t necessarily have to take up this case, so it’s at the discretion of the Court of Appeals.”
GSU law professor Anthony Kreis spoke with Fox News about the Trump election interference scandal in Georgia. (FOX News/Claudia Kelly Bazan)
Click here to download the FOX News app
But he said he believed the appeal would succeed because of McAfee’s “textbook” approach to previous cases. “He seems to understand that this case is very important and everything has to be done methodically.”
Kreis said it was unlikely that McAfee would rule from the bench. He had hoped for a more detailed ruling with supporting legal memoranda, rather than a final decision from the court.
