scorecard
  1. Home
  2. Politics
  3. world
  4. news
  5. Fani Willis takes the stand hellbent on setting the record straight — but legal experts are split on whether her testimony did more harm than good

Fani Willis takes the stand hellbent on setting the record straight — but legal experts are split on whether her testimony did more harm than good

Erin Snodgrass,Haven Orecchio-Egresitz,Jacob Shamsian,Natalie Musumeci   

Fani Willis takes the stand hellbent on setting the record straight — but legal experts are split on whether her testimony did more harm than good
  • Fulton County DA Fani Willis took the stand with a fiery approach to questions about her private life.
  • Legal experts said a judge is unlikely to dismiss Willis from Trump's Georgia election interference case.

ATLANTA, Georgia — Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis took the stand in a contentious Thursday court hearing as she sought to restore her reputation after allegations of having an improper relationship with Nathan Wade, the prosecutor she hired as lead lawyer in the Georgia election interference case against former President Donald Trump and his codefendants.

Scott McAfee, the 35-year-old Fulton County judge overseeing the case, scheduled the highly unusual hearing to determine whether Willis, Wade, or both of them had a conflict of interest that should disqualify them from prosecuting the case.

On the stand, Willis was pugnacious, fighting with defense lawyers and vacillating between snarky quips and full-on shouting at times as she delved into the details of her and Wade's romantic relationship and her personal finances.

Willis' office brought a grand jury indictment against Trump and more than a dozen co-defendants in August 2023, accusing them of participating in a sprawling criminal conspiracy to overturn the results of the 2020 election in Georgia.

Several of the defendants have since pleaded guilty to their role in the conspiracy. But attorneys for Mike Roman, a former Trump campaign advisor, threw a wrench into the DA's proceedings.

Citing a filing from Wade's divorce proceedings, attorneys for the defendants alleged that Wade and Willis had an improper relationship. Willis hired Wade in November 2021 for the election interference investigation.

The defendants' attorneys allege Wade paid for lavish trips for both of them during the course of their romantic relationship. A witness for the defense attorneys alleged Thursday that Willis and Wade's relationship began in 2019. Both Willis and Wade testified that their romantic relationship, which they said ended last summer, began around March 2022.

Attorneys for Trump and his codefendants have argued that the trips Wade put on his credit card count as financial benefits and should disqualify Willis from the case.

Wade and Willis pushed back against those characterizations, both testifying Thursday that she paid him back in cash or by picking up other bills on their outings.

But legal experts are mixed on just how successful Willis' testimony actually was.

A hearing that never should have happened

Stephen Gillers, a New York University law professor and expert on legal ethics, said McCaffee should have never held the hearing in the first place.

"The parts of the hearing I've watched sound like an opportunity for voyeurism or the plot for a modern-day Scarlet Letter. It's a sad day for the rule of law in Georgia," he said.

"Judges I know would never let a hearing like this proceed. But this judge is young and inexperienced," Gillers continued.

The hearing — live streamed on YouTube and aired on cable TV due to Georgia courts' lax rules about public access to the judiciary — offered a raw look into the private life of the top prosecutor.

It touched on her challenges dating in her 40s, how her life changed with threats following the Trump indictment, and the independence she has fostered for herself at this stage in her career. It also included allusions to Wade's health issues, allegations of sexism, and Willis's thoughts on how men and women differ in their approach to ending relationships.

None of those issues, Gillers said, had any bearing on whether Willis should be disqualified from the case.

"Nothing in the moving papers supports Willis's disqualification," he said. "The motion should have been dismissed out of hand or referred to the state disciplinary committee for consideration."

Norman Eisen, an attorney and former diplomat who served as special counsel to the House Judiciary Committee during Trump's first impeachment trial, called the Thursday hearing a "spectacle."

"At the end of the day, it is clear that those who are trying to disqualify DA Willis have not met their steep burden under Georgia law to prove a conflict," Eisen said in a statement shared with Business Insider.

Too arrogant to prepare to testify

Other legal experts, however, were less dismissive of the hearing's merits and more critical of Willis' performance.

Sarah Krissoff, a former federal prosecutor in New York, said the defendants' accusations are not "frivolous," adding that even the appearance of a conflict of interest in the case has to be addressed because of the national importance of the Trump-related legal proceedings.

"She seemed to be dismissing it and not taking it as seriously as it is," Krissoff told BI of Willis.

While on the stand, Willis cracked jokes and snapped back at defense attorneys, appearing eager to retake control of the case. At one point, she quipped to a lawyer, "Don't be cute with me."

Mark Bederow, a defense attorney and former prosecutor in the Manhattan DA's office, called Willis' and Wade's testimony "a full-fledged disaster."

"It's as if she is so arrogant, she wasn't prepared to testify," Bederow said of Willis.

He was also shocked by the former couple's claims that Willis exclusively paid Wade for their trips with large amounts of cash she said she regularly keeps on hand.

"A seasoned lawyer, no records? No paper?" Bederow questioned of Wade.

Neama Rahmani, a former federal prosecutor in California, said he was also skeptical of Willis' and Wade's explanations on the stand.

"We all have Venmo and Zelle. She said she never Cash Apped him," Rahmani said. "Everything was cash and he never deposited it? I just don't find that believable."

Willis has been forced to go on the defense

At one point, Willis reminded the court, "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."

Despite being on the back foot during Thursday's hearing, several legal experts said the hearing is unlikely to affect the case from a legal standpoint. Most experts were skeptical that the evidence presented Thursday would lead to Willis or Wade being dismissed from the case.

But that might not matter in the long run, Rahmani said.

"Willis came out swinging, but I would say it's too little, too late," he told BI. "She has lost the PR battle."

Willis waited weeks to address the allegations, only confirming her and Wade's relationship in a filing earlier this month, though she denied any financial impropriety as a result of their relationship.

But the DA's delayed response time, coupled with testimony from her former friend on Thursday who contradicted Willis' claims about when her relationship with Wade actually began, has undercut Willis' control of the case, Rahmani said.

"This is an embarrassing sideshow. She's on the defense when she should be on the offense," Rahmani said.

Krissoff concurred, saying that Thursday's hearing may have done damage to Willis' reputation with the public.

"Even if Willis is ultimately successful, Trump's team is going to be screaming six ways to Sunday that this was a biased, flawed prosecution," Krissoff said.

"And even if the judge doesn't buy that argument, I think the public might," she added. "That might be a constituency that's more important than the judge."

The hearing will continue, with Willis resuming testimony on Friday.



Popular Right Now



Advertisement