Law Details of Fani Willis’ alleged ‘improper’ relationship with prosecutor may go public as judge unseals his divorce case

[Kingz]

I'm still waiting to see how when the two prosecutors started fucking somehow resulted in prejudice against trump.

Any of the incels want to explain it to me?

Clearly Fanni and Wade thought it was a big ethics violation as well..seeing as they just perjured themselves about the time their relationship began because they know that Wade(who doesn’t have the experience or merit to lead a case as wide ranging and high stakes as this, unless he’s balling the DA) being assigned to the case and that salary because of an affair with the DA is disqualifying ethics violation.

 

[Super_Nintendo]

"can you incels explain to me how a massive ethics violation is related to the practice of law?? i was a never a district attorney or anything so explain this to me you unemployed, cheeto eating, basement dwellers. i got better stuff to do than post with sub 80 IQ mouth breathing chuds" - darkballs

 

[High Test With da Best]

Lol, the meltdown from libs watching their political prosecution slip away is pretty entertaining. The district is 80% democrat with a jury pool of 8th grade wiccans and bums who burn down a Wendy's because they're not allowed to bodyslam cops and steal their weapons when they get blackout drunk and drive around. This hoodrat didn't even have to present a coherent case, all she had to do was not hire a male prostitute with tax money and lie under oath, and she couldn't even do that.

fani got a new boo though. langford missed his chance and idrank gonna take her out to the cabin for more fucking and sucking set to an AI album of barry white singing trump's indictments.

Can't get enough of your fraaauud babyyy...

You guys are killin me here hahaha!

Had to use the laughing emoji for the first time

 

[Darkballs]

Clearly Fanni and Wade thought it was a big ethics violation as well..seeing as they just perjured themselves about the time their relationship began because they know that Wade(who doesn’t have the experience or merit to lead a case as wide ranging and high stakes as this, unless he’s balling the DA) being assigned to the case and that salary because of an affair with the DA is disqualifying ethics violation.

You guys are accepting every allegation made by the private investigator as ironclad fact.

Regardless of when you think they started banging, neither you nor anyone else has even tried to make a case about how this prejudiced trump or invalidates the grand jury indictment.

Look, we all understand the goal, given that trump has not defense for charges against him, is to just attack the character of all involved. We've done this with every case on a docket. The judges are secret deep state agents. Their clerks are secretly dating Chuck Shumer. But none of it ever has any legal relevance.

"can you incels explain to me how a massive ethics violation is related to the practice of law?? i was a never a district attorney or anything so explain this to me you unemployed, cheeto eating, basement dwellers. i got better stuff to do than post with sub 80 IQ mouth breathing chuds" - darkballs

The floor is yours if you'd like to explain how this effects trump or the ongoing charges. Don't try and snipe without the courage to tag. Try to make an argument for once.

 

[Super_Nintendo]

You guys are accepting every allegation made by the private investigator as ironclad fact.

Regardless of when you think they started banging, neither you nor anyone else has even tried to make a case about how this prejudiced trump or invalidates the grand jury indictment.

Look, we all understand the goal, given that trump has not defense for charges against him, is to just attack the character of all involved. We've done this with every case on a docket. The judges are secret deep state agents. Their clerks are secretly dating Chuck Shumer. But none of it ever has any legal relevance.





The floor is yours if you'd like to explain how this effects trump or the ongoing charges. Don't try and snipe without the courage to tag. Try to make an argument for once.

1. you're free to disagree but i think this whole thing is political and this just reconfirms that they're shady scumbags with poor character going after the guy.

2. grand juries indict 95-99% of the time so they're a worthless formality anyway. you can indict donny's left nut if you wanted to.

"The Rate of Indictment

Based on the influence of the prosecutor, who (other than the court reporter) is the only non-juror present and who selects the evidence to present, various studies have suggested that the rate of indictment by a grand jury ranges from approximately 95% to approximately 99%."
https://www.pooleshaffery.com/news/2014/december/a-crash-course-in-the-american-grand-jury-system/



Extremely rare for grand jury not to return indictment, statistics show
In the more than 162,500 cases prosecuted by U.S. attorneys from 2009 to 2010, grand juries voted not to return an indictment in just 11

"In the more than 162,500 cases prosecuted by U.S. attorneys from 2009 to 2010, grand juries voted not to return an indictment in only 11, according to data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics — equivalent to one in 14,759 cases, or 0.0068 percent."
https://news.yahoo.com/ferguson-federal-grand-jury-indictment-statistics-history-134942645.html?


3. does it invalidate the charges? no, they can disqualify this whole team and set up another, but who knows if anyone will take it and who knows if they will need to go over the case again since the previous handlers were unethical scumbags.

4. if you want me to dispute "the facts". yeah it's easy. election interference by democrats.

 

[Darkballs]

1. you're free to disagree but i think this whole thing is political and this just reconfirms that they're shady scumbags with poor character going after the guy.

2. grand juries indict 95-99% of the time so they're a worthless formality anyway. you can indict donny's left nut if you wanted to.

"The Rate of Indictment

Based on the influence of the prosecutor, who (other than the court reporter) is the only non-juror present and who selects the evidence to present, various studies have suggested that the rate of indictment by a grand jury ranges from approximately 95% to approximately 99%."
https://www.pooleshaffery.com/news/2014/december/a-crash-course-in-the-american-grand-jury-system/



Extremely rare for grand jury not to return indictment, statistics show
In the more than 162,500 cases prosecuted by U.S. attorneys from 2009 to 2010, grand juries voted not to return an indictment in just 11

"In the more than 162,500 cases prosecuted by U.S. attorneys from 2009 to 2010, grand juries voted not to return an indictment in only 11, according to data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics — equivalent to one in 14,759 cases, or 0.0068 percent."
https://news.yahoo.com/ferguson-federal-grand-jury-indictment-statistics-history-134942645.html?


3. does it invalidate the charges? no, they can disqualify this whole team and set up another, but who knows if anyone will take it and who knows if they will need to go over the case again since the previous handlers were unethical scumbags.

4. if you want me to dispute "the facts". yeah it's easy. election interference by democrats.

None of this addresses the charges against trump. Grand juries indicting a lot, is often because prosecutors don't waste their time with things that aren't a sure bet. For example, having audio recording of the guy trying unlawfully fuck with a state election, is a great piece of evidence to show to a jury in a case about a guy trying to unlawfully fuck with a state election.

The bottom line is Willis sex life has nothing to do with trumps guilt. And his team can't even explain, theoretically, how it would. Willis only sought to indict trump due to wanting to give work to a fellow prosecutor because she was nailing him?

This is why every one of trump's legal cases is just filled with off topic bullshit from the maga crowd. Zero defense to something we all know he did. So lets attack the character of everyone and then vaguely assert that this amounts to bias against daddy.

It's boring.

 

[CantCucktheTuck]

I love watching the scumbags that go after trump getting their lives destroyed.

 

[CatchnShoot]

I love watching the scumbags that go after trump getting their lives destroyed.

lol... take your W's where you can get them. I know they are few and far between for MAGA these days.

I have faith that the legal system isn't fully retarded and will be able to stay on point. The actual trial will proceed as planned.

 

[kflo]

I love watching the scumbags that go after trump getting their lives destroyed.

Trump has had people like you carrying water for him his whole life. It’s why he truly believes laws don’t even apply to him.

 

[CantCucktheTuck]

 

[andnowweknow]

She's not getting removed...

 

[MTT]

The judge ordered Terrence Bradley to retake the stand.

“Based on the in camera hearing with Bradley, the Court believes that the interested parties did not meet their burden of establishing that the communication(s) are covered by attorney-client privilege and therefore the hearing can resume as to Mr. Bradley’s examination,” an email from Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee obtained by CNN said."

https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/26/politics/nathan-wade-divorce-attorney-testimony-willis-georgia/index.html

 

[CantCucktheTuck]

The judge ordered Terrence Bradley to retake the stand.

“Based on the in camera hearing with Bradley, the Court believes that the interested parties did not meet their burden of establishing that the communication(s) are covered by attorney-client privilege and therefore the hearing can resume as to Mr. Bradley’s examination,” an email from Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee obtained by CNN said."

https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/26/politics/nathan-wade-divorce-attorney-testimony-willis-georgia/index.html

I believe he tried to keep from testifying about certain details, especially the time line.

 

[Death By Samson]

I believe he tried to keep from testifying about certain details, especially the time line.

And Wade's team tried to block him from testifying. I wonder why? It's almost like he has information that will contradict what Willis and Wade have testified to under oath.

 

[CatchnShoot]

Well,Bradley DID testify that he had no (Zero) first hand knowledge, so by definition any testimony that he would provide would be hearsay, and should NOT be entered. So ....duh.

 

[CatchnShoot]

What I don't understand is why there is two weeks between the initial evidentiary hearing and the next installment this coming Friday. If other industries worked like this, nothing would get done.

 

[CantCucktheTuck]

Well,Bradley DID testify that he had no (Zero) first hand knowledge, so by definition any testimony that he would provide would be hearsay, and should NOT be entered. So ....duh.

things that wade may have told him as a friend or a lawyer isn't "hearsay".

 

[N13]

I got my popcorn and and kool aid ready. 2 pm

 

[panamaican]

What I don't understand is why there is two weeks between the initial evidentiary hearing and the next installment this coming Friday. If other industries worked like this, nothing would get done.

Welcome to the practice of law. Where cases can take years to resolve an issue that people can logically figure out in an afternoon.

 

[N13]

Welcome to the practice of law. Where cases can take years to resolve an issue that people can logically figure out in an afternoon.

Maximize the legal fees is standard practice.