Fulton County hearing: Trump case hangs in balance as judge mulls DA Willis' disqualification

The defense wants to disqualify DA Fani Willis in Trump's Georgia election case.

Following three days of testimony plus closing arguments, Scott McAfee, the judge overseeing former President Donald Trump's Georgia election interference case, is weighing motions to disqualify Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, primarily over accusations from Trump co-defendant Michael Roman that she benefited financially from a "personal, romantic relationship" with prosecutor Nathan Wade, who she hired for the case.

Willis and Wade, in a court filing, 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."


0

Former associate of Wade expected to testify next

Less than 10 minutes after the hearing started, the court is in recess until Judge McAfee hears from both parties.

Terrance Bradley, a former business associate of Nathan Wade, is expected to testify but he is not in court yet.

Bradley briefly testified Thursday but the issue of attorney-client privilege came up and he was dismissed.

Attorneys are currently going over the questions for Bradley that won't violate privilege.


Willis does not take stand on Day 2 of hearing

After a dramatic and heated Day 1, DA Fani Willis is not taking the stand for Day 2 of the hearing.

The state told the court they have no further questions for the district attorney.

Multiple attorneys for defendants in the case, including Trump's attorney Steve Sadow and Michael Roman's attorney Ashleigh Merchant, are in the courtroom, but Willis is not present.

Judge Scott McAfee said his goal is to finish up the evidentiary hearing today.


Court adjourns, Willis will be back on stand Friday

DA Fani Willis stepped off the stand for the day following more than two hours of highly charged testimony.

The DA is scheduled to be back on the stand tomorrow morning for the hearing's second day.

Judge McAfee reviewed other motions for Day 2, then adjourned the hearing until Friday.

Willis did not respond to questions from ABC News after leaving the courtroom.


Willis questioned by lawyers for other co-defendants

After Trump attorney Steve Sadow wrapped up his questioning of DA Fani Willis, the attorneys for other co-defendants got their chance -- but the judge appeared to grow frustrated as defense attorneys attempted to find new lines of questioning.

Allyn Stockton, representing co-defendant Rudy Giuliani, asked Willis about contracts given to Wade's law partners.

"Did Wade's law partners, Bradley and Campbell, also get contracts with the DA's office?" Stockton asked.

"Yes but only for a short time after I first became DA. Then I let them go when my office was properly staffed," she replied.

Harry MacDougald, representing co-defendant Jeffrey Clark, briefly questioned Willis about her financial disclosure form before the judge told him to sit down.

"I don't believe she answered that question, Your Honor," MacDougald said.

"She answered as to specific individual gifts," Judge McAfee, appearing more frustrated, responded. "And you're not listening to my answer either. So we're done."


Trump attorney presses Bradley on dates of relationship

Prosecutor Nathan Wade's former attorney Terrence Bradley described his past statements as "speculation" when Donald Trump's attorney Steve Sadow confronted him with past text messages Bradley exchanged with another defense attorney that appeared inconsistent with his current testimony.

"That's speculation on my part," Bradley said. "I stated that I was speculating."

Sadow showed him past text messages where Bradley said Wade and DA Fani Willis "absolutely" began their relationship before Wade was hired by Willis.

"It started when she left the DAs office and was [a] judge in South Fulton. They met at the Municipal Court CLE conference," Bradley said in a text message that was entered into evidence.

Claiming he was speculating in that text, Bradley reiterated that he does not have direct information about when the relationship began. He said that between 2018 and 2022, he only spoke with Wade about the relationship once.

"I do not know when the relationship started between Mr. Wade and Ms. Willis. I cannot recall that," Bradley said.

"Is it your testimony that you don't know, under oath, whether or not there was a relationship between Mr. Wade and Ms. Willis, before the contract?" Sadow asked, referring to Wade's November 2021 contract with the DA.

"I do not recall any dates of when the relationship started," Bradley responded.

Sadow, however, appeared incredulous of Bradley and hammered at his claim.

"That's the true explanation because you don't want to admit it in court, correct?" Sadow said.

Bradley did not change his account of the relationship, despite Sadow's repeated questions.

Sadow ultimately concluded his questions by reminding Bradley about the stakes of his testimony.

"You realize that if you were to testify under oath that you knew from Mr. Wade that the relationship between him and Miss Willis existed before the contract on November 1 of 2021 ... that would show that both Ms. Willis and Mr. Wade had lied under oath. You know that don't you?" Sadow said, prompting a sustained objection.