Irony: Fani Hits Reverse On Reopening Evidence in DQ Hearing

Advertisement

From the filing:

The irony of the staff of one district attorney’s office objecting to a member of another district attorney’s office prepared to come forward and testify regarding the disqualification of a district attorney should not be lost on the Court.

The State’s opposition to the testimony of Ms. Yeager and Mr. Arora is particularly perplexing in light of the fact that the prosecution itself had requested that this Court accept an affidavit (not sworn under penalty of perjury) from Mr. Herbert Brody, a wine salesperson or, in the event that the Court declined to accept Mr. Brody’s affidavit, requested that Mr. Brody be permitted to testify. See Notice of Filing State’s Proposed Supplemental Exhibit 1 to the Hearing on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss and Disqualify.In making its request to present the testimony of Mr. Brody, the prosecution cited no alleged standards relating to “finality” or failure to present evidence in a timely manner.


(via Twitchy)

Ed Morrissey

Fani Willis' office proposed Brody as a witness who could attest to Willis' habit of carrying around a lot of cash. That's not terribly relevant, since it doesn't offer any proof of the central contention that Willis repaid Wade in that manner for her travel expenses. I'd bet that Judge Scott McAfee would not have been persuaded to allow Brody's testimony even if he did reopen the evidentiary phase of the inquiry. But if this filing is accurate, it shows just how incompetent Willis is in making the request to reopen more legitimate. 

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Trending on HotAir Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement