Judge Scott McAfee in his bombshell ruling Friday writes that neither Fani Willis nor defense lawyers were able to establish conclusively when her affair with special prosecutor Nathan Wade began – but still says an ‘odor of mendacity’ remains.
He calls out the Fulton County DA for legally ‘improper statements,’ blasts Wade for lying in his divorce case, and rips the credibility of a witness who couldn’t recall key elements of his own text exchanges.
He addressed a key dispute from his evidence hearing last month about when the steamy affair began, which brought conflicting testimony between Willis and Wade on one side, and a former college friend and the texts of Wade’s former lawyer on another.
‘The Court is not under an obligation to ferret out every instance of potential dishonesty from each witness or defendant ever presented in open court,’ McAfee writes.
‘Such an expectation would mean an end to the efficient disposition of criminal and civil proceedings.’
Fulton County Superior Judge Scott McAfee tore into Fulton County DA Fani Willis’ conduct in his new ruling
‘Yet reasonable questions about whether the District Attorney and her hand-selected lead [prosecutor] testified untruthfully about the timing of their relationship further underpin the finding of an appearance of impropriety and the need to make proportional efforts to cure it.’
Although the judge was unpersuaded by defense lawyers’ claims of an actual financial conflict of interest, he rules that there was an ‘appearance’ of one and that the DA should have anticipated it.
To McAfee such appearance issues are no minor matter. Citing case law on the matter, McAfee noted that even the appearance of impropriety ‘threatens confidence in the legal system itself.’
He ruled that the appearance exists even if the relationship began after Willis had hired Wade, as each of them claim – noting that Willis kept him on the payroll while they were dating.
‘Even if the romantic relationship began after SADA Wade’s initial contract in November 2021, the District Attorney chose to continue supervising and paying Wade while maintaining such a relationship.’
He also calls her out for her financial practices, which as she testified included relying on large sums of cash, almost no receipts, and ad hoc transfers with her romantic partner.
‘She further allowed the regular and loose exchange of money between them without any exact or verifiable measure of reconciliation. This lack of a confirmed financial split creates the possibility and appearance that the District Attorney benefited – albeit non-materially – from a contract whose award lay solely within her purview and policing,’ he writes.
He also calls out Wade for being untruthful in his divorce case that surfaced the affair allegations that upended the case.
He pointed to Wade’s ‘patently unpersuasive explanation for the inaccurate interrogatories he submitted in his pending divorce indicates a willingness on his part to wrongly conceal his relationship with the District Attorney.’
As the case continued, ‘reasonable members of the public could easilybe left to wonder whether the financial exchanges have continued resulting in some form of benefit to the District Attorney, or even whether the romantic relationship has resumed,’ McAfee wrote.
He ruled that ‘neither side’ was able to establish when the relationship ‘evolved’ into a romantic one.
In addition to admonishing Wade, he said he found the testimony of Wade’s former lawyer Terrance Bradley not credible.
‘First, the Court finds itself unable to place any stock in the testimony of Terrance Bradley. His inconsistencies, demeanor, and generally non-responsive answers left far too brittle a foundation upon which to build any conclusions,’ he writes.
He also called out Willis for her speech to an Atlanta church where she blasted the initial filing that referenced her affair and tore into defense lawyers. Donald Trump’s lawyer Steven Sadow accursed her of playing the ‘race card.’
The judge noted that Willis didn’t mention any defendant by name, and her speech was far enough from jury selection to taint the jury pool.
‘But it was still legally improper,’ he wrote. Providing this type of public comment creates dangerous waters for the District Attorney to wade further into. The time may well have arrived for an order preventing the State from mentioning the case in any public forum to prevent prejudicial pretrial publicity, but that is not the motion presently before the Court,’ he wrote, even while denying the defense motion for ‘forensic misconduct.’
Sadow blasted the ruling in his own statement Friday.
‘While respecting the Court’s decision, we believe that the it did not afford appropriate significance to the prosecutorial misconduct of Willis and Wade, including the financial benefits, testifying untruthfully about when their personal relationship began, as well as Willis’ extrajudicial MLK “church speech,” where she played the race card and falsely accused the defendants and their counsel of racism. We will use all legal options available as we continue to fight to end this case, which should never have been brought in the first place,’ he wrote – suggesting an appeal could be in the works.
Willis can stay on the Trump election interference case in Georgia but only if she cuts ties with her prosecutor lover Nathan Wade, a McAfee dramatically ruled Friday.
In his ruling Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee slammed Willis for a ‘tremendous lapse in judgment’ and acting in an ‘unprofessional manner’ when she gave evidence in his court.
Judge McAfee made the stunning comments as he considered whether Willis should be disqualified from the case she brought against Donald Trump and 18 codefendants.
The judge ruled that her relationship with Wade did not amount to an ‘actual conflict’ of interest.
But he went on: ‘This finding is by no means an indication that the Court condones this tremendous lapse in judgment or the unprofessional manner of the District Attorney’s testimony during the evidentiary hearing.’
He added that ‘an odor of mendacity remains’ but the court was not ‘under an obligation to ferret out every instance of potential dishonesty from each witness.’
McAfee had self-imposed a deadline of this week to rule after holding bombshell hearings featuring testimony by Willis herself about her ‘romantic’ relationship with Wade.
At issue in his decision was when the affair between the two prosecutors began, and whether it posed an actual conflict of interest or the appearance of one.
The judge and clashing attorneys explored those issues in sensational hearings that featured angry testimony by Willis.
She was confronted by defense lawyers and there was conflicting testimony about whether the couple were involved in a ‘romantic’ relationship before Wade joined her team in 2021.
The hearings also featured details about cruises and luxury travel the pair engaged in – and whether it constituted any sort of improper benefit to Willis that allowed her to gain financially from the prosecution of Trump and his allies.
In his ruling Judge McAfee said: ‘The prosecution of this case cannot proceed until the State selects one of two options.
‘The District Attorney may choose to step aside, along with the whole of her office.
‘Alternatively, Wade can withdraw, allowing the District Attorney, the Defendants, and the public to move forward without his presence or remuneration distracting from and potentially compromising the merits of this case.’
The judge stressed that ‘no ruling of mine is ever gong to be based on politics.’
He then sorted through whether Wade and Willis had an actual financial conflict.
Judge McAfee wrote: ‘Whenever a private attorney – like Wade – is paid by the billable hour, a motive exists to extend or prolong the assignment.
‘This, however, is a tension that the legal profession has long accepted.’
His ruling goes through the various trips the pair took, including to Aruba and Napa Valley.
But he found Willis did not get a ‘direct financial benefit’ from her decision to hire Wade.
He also essentially accepted her claims that she reimbursed Wade in cash for expenses during their travels.
‘Such a reimbursement practice may be unusual and the lack of any documentary corroboration understandably concerning.
‘Yet the testimony withstood direct contradiction, was corroborated by other evidence (for example, her payment of airfare for two on the 2022 Miami trip), and was not so incredible as to be inherently unbelievable. However, as the District Attorney herself acknowledged, no ledger exists.
‘Other than a “best guesstimate,” there is no way to be certain that expenses were split completely evenly – and the District Attorney may well have received a net benefit of several hundred dollars.’
Trump and the other defendants are charged with a racketeering conspiracy to overturn the state of Georgia’s election results in 2020 after it voted for Joe Biden.
The ruling on whether Willis should be disqualified has high-stakes implications for Trump and his codefendants as well as the nation.
A disqualification of Willis would throw off the schedule for the Georgia case at a time when some of Trump’s other trials are in peril.
Judge McAfee’s ruling comes shortly after he dismissed three charges against Trump from the sprawling racketeering indictment brought by Willis and her prosecutors’ office.
McAfee wrote Wednesday in an order that six of the charges in the indictment must be quashed.
But the order leaves intact many other charges in the indictment and the judge wrote that prosecutors could seek a new indictment on the charges he dismissed.
The six charges in question have to do with allegedly soliciting elected officials to violate their oaths of office.
That includes two charges related to Trump’s infamous phone call to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, a fellow Republican, on Jan. 2, 2021 asking him to ‘find’ 11,780 votes.
ulton County District Attorney Fani Willis looks on during a hearing on the Georgia election interference case, Friday, March, 1, 2024, in Atlanta
Willis and Wade acknowledged the affair in filings and testimony
Explosive allegations of an affair
The relationship between Willis and Wade burst onto the national scene after lawyer Ashleigh Merchant, who represents Trump codefendant Michael Roman, issued a court filing in January.
It alleged that Willis and Wade had an ‘ongoing, personal relationship’ even as Wade got paid more than $600,000 serving as special prosecutor on the case.
It claimed they engaged in ‘a personal, romantic relationship that has ultimately yielded substantial income to the special prosecutor.’
That prompted a response from Willis that denied any improper conduct even while confirming the affair.
‘Much of Defendant Roman’s motion relies on supposition and innuendo regarding the private relationship between District Attorney Willis and Special Prosecutor Wade,’ according to the filing.
‘District Attorney Willis has no personal conflict of interest that justifies her disqualification personally or that of the Fulton County District Attorney’s Office,’ she writes.
‘While the allegations raised in the various motions are salacious and garnered the media attention they were designed to obtain, none provide this Court with any basis upon which to order the relief they seek,’ she wrote.
John Floyd III, father of Fulton District Attorney Fani Willis, testified about living with her while she dated a man named ‘Deuce,’ and said he didn’t know his daughter was later dating prosecutor Nathan Wade
Fulton County Special Prosecutor Nathan Wade faced a series of questions about out of town trips with Willis and the ways he and Willis paid for them
Dramatic testimony by former friends of both Willis and Wade
A mid-February hearing featured testimony by former Willis friend and colleague Robin Yeartie, who directly contradicted Willis and Wade by saying there was ‘no doubt’ the two were in a romantic relationship before Wade got hired. She said she was ‘certain’ about it.
She said the DA, a former college friend, told her about it personally.
Defense lawyers called Terrance Bradley, a former friend of Wade’s, also appeared under subpoena. He was a former law partner of Wade’s who also acted as his divorce lawyer. His appearance brought a fight over attorney-client privilege, as defense lawyers tried to force him to testify about conversations they said would speak to the personal relationship and when it began.
The drama peaked when a furious Willis slapped back at ‘extremely offensive’ allegations she slept with her prosecutor ex-boyfriend Nathan Wade the first time they met.
‘It’s a lie, it’s a lie,’ she said. She accused Merchant of ‘trying to implicate that you slept with somebody the first day you met the.’
‘I’m not on trial, no matter how hard you try to put me on trial,’ she told Merchant, who during a dramatic moment got to question the DA she is facing in court after exposing her affair.
She also lashed out at the media for ‘printing lies for the world to see’ and the attorneys for suggesting they hadn’t verified any information about their luxury work trips and their ‘good’ sex life.
In Wade’s own earlier testimony, he shot back at Donald Trump’s lawyer Stephen Sadow’s questions, steering his answers to literal comments about sex.
Wade told him that his relationship with Willis ended in the summer of 2023, prompting Sadow to ask if they had ‘any personal relationship at all’ at that point.
‘Are you asking me have I had intercourse with the district attorney?’ Wade shot back.
‘The answer would be no.’
‘You say personal. We’re very good friends,’ he told Sadow. ‘Probably closer than ever because of these attacks. But if you’re asking me about specific intercourse, the answer is no.’
Terrance Bradley, a former law partner of Wade’s, was the first witness to appear. He and his lawyer raised attorney client privilege issues when he got asked about the relationship. He later got confronted with texts with lawyer Ashleigh Merchant
Robin Latrice Yeartie testified that Fulton County DA told her about meeting special prosecutor Nathan Wade at a judicial conference in 2019, in a bombshell hearing to determine if Willis gets disqualified from the case of Donald Trump and codefendants
This handout image released by the Fulton County Sheriff’s Office on August 24, 2023 shows the booking photo of former US President Donald Trump.. Former US president Donald Trump was photographed for a police mug shot after his arrest on August 24 at the Fulton County Jail in Georgia
Clash over when the affair began
Both Willis and Wade testified their romantic relationship began after Willis brought him on.
They also confirmed information in Merchant’s initial filing about luxury trips and cruises together.
But Willis denied any financial conflict, saying she always paid her way, and said she did so in cash.
‘If you’re a woman and you go on a date with a man you better have $200 in case,’ she further advised.
Willis said on her ‘worst days’ she had $500 cash. ‘At my best days, I probably had $15,000 in my house, cash,’ she said.
She also said her belief in storing a stash of cash came from her father, something her father, backed up in his own time on the stand.
John Floyd III, a former Black Panther, flew in from California to testify that his daughter always carried cash at his insistence, that she was dating a deejay named ‘Deuce’ in 2019 when he moved in with her. He said he didn’t meet Wade until after Wade and Willis started prosecuting Trump.
Defense lawyers charged that Willis kept her relationship with Wade a secret from her office as well as from her father.
Fulton County Special prosecutor Anna Cross, who is representing the DA in the matter, announced a decision not to question Willis further after her appearance, which moved the case onto other matters.
Attorney Ashleigh Merchant initiated the effort to remove Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis from the Georgia election interference case against former President Donald Trump
Former President Donald Trump speaks , Saturday, March 9, 2024, in Rome, Ga
Wade’s lawyer Terrence Bradley doesn’t recall relationship origins despite texts
Another critical moment came during testimony by Wade’s former law partner Terrence Bradley.
Bradley on the stand was unable to call details of the origins of the relationship.
‘I do not have knowledge of it starting, or when it started,’ he said.
‘I don’t recall any specific dates,’ he said under questioning. ‘I don’t have anything — it wasn’t a specific date … There wasn’t something I can attribute to him telling me whatever. You are asking for a date, asking for a year … and I am telling you at this time I am telling you that I do not have the date.’
He kept that line even amid questioning about his texts with Merchant where he made statements that the relationship started earlier than Willis and Wade claimed.
‘I was speculating, I didn’t have a – no one told me. I was speculating,’ he testified.
That included a text when he told Merchant the two had begun dating when Willis was a judge in South Fulton.
‘Why would you speculate when she was asking you a direct question about when the relationship started?’ Sadow pressed him.
‘I have no answer for that,’ Bradley responded.