GA Case

[Anonymous]

The US legal system is based upon the presumption of innocence. Courts are not supposed to use circumstantial evidence to convict. In this case, Ashley Merchant, lawyer representing Michael Roman, would need to present actual evidence of the inappropriate use of funds. So far, the evidence is circumstantial. Nathan Wade purchased tickets for a trip that Fani Willis went on. Willis has countered that she reimbursed him in cash using funds leftover from her last campaign where she loaned her campaign $50K and then kept leftover unused money in cash at home. There is documented evidence that she took out the $50K to loan to her campaign, which suggests she would have the cash at home to pay for the travel tickets. A vendor in Napa Valley, one of the places that she traveled with Wade, has said in the news that she purchased $400 of wine at the vineyard and he expected her, like most of his clients, to pay by card, but she pulled out $400 in cash and clearly had more on her at the time, to pay for the wine. When he commented that it was unusual, she said that she always pays cash. She has also said she reimburses her dates for expenses because she does not want to be beholden to any man.

In any event, for her to be taken off the case, the defense attorney would need to prove, not circumstantially, but with actual evidence, that she actually benefitted from the money that was paid to Nathan Wade. The timeline of when they began their romance is a red herring, while it is a conflict of interest, it does not show an actual benefit that Fani Willis received from hiring Nathan Wade.

So, unless Ashley Merchant can show actual evidence and not circumstantial evidence of a financial benefit, there is insufficient grounds to remove either of them from the case.

[Anonymous]

When will Georgia decide whether or not Willis is disqualified?

It would be preferable to get beyond this side circus Trump has created and proceed with his prosecution.

“All I need is for you to help me find 11,780 votes”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The US legal system is based upon the presumption of innocence. Courts are not supposed to use circumstantial evidence to convict. In this case, Ashley Merchant, lawyer representing Michael Roman, would need to present actual evidence of the inappropriate use of funds. So far, the evidence is circumstantial. Nathan Wade purchased tickets for a trip that Fani Willis went on. Willis has countered that she reimbursed him in cash using funds leftover from her last campaign where she loaned her campaign $50K and then kept leftover unused money in cash at home. There is documented evidence that she took out the $50K to loan to her campaign, which suggests she would have the cash at home to pay for the travel tickets. A vendor in Napa Valley, one of the places that she traveled with Wade, has said in the news that she purchased $400 of wine at the vineyard and he expected her, like most of his clients, to pay by card, but she pulled out $400 in cash and clearly had more on her at the time, to pay for the wine. When he commented that it was unusual, she said that she always pays cash. She has also said she reimburses her dates for expenses because she does not want to be beholden to any man.

In any event, for her to be taken off the case, the defense attorney would need to prove, not circumstantially, but with actual evidence, that she actually benefitted from the money that was paid to Nathan Wade. The timeline of when they began their romance is a red herring, while it is a conflict of interest, it does not show an actual benefit that Fani Willis received from hiring Nathan Wade.

So, unless Ashley Merchant can show actual evidence and not circumstantial evidence of a financial benefit, there is insufficient grounds to remove either of them from the case.

If the factual evidence, cell phone records, contradicts the testimony given by Willis and Wade then nothing more needs to be proven. In that case not only will they be disqualified from the case they will most likely be removed from the Georgia bar.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The US legal system is based upon the presumption of innocence. Courts are not supposed to use circumstantial evidence to convict. In this case, Ashley Merchant, lawyer representing Michael Roman, would need to present actual evidence of the inappropriate use of funds. So far, the evidence is circumstantial. Nathan Wade purchased tickets for a trip that Fani Willis went on. Willis has countered that she reimbursed him in cash using funds leftover from her last campaign where she loaned her campaign $50K and then kept leftover unused money in cash at home. There is documented evidence that she took out the $50K to loan to her campaign, which suggests she would have the cash at home to pay for the travel tickets. A vendor in Napa Valley, one of the places that she traveled with Wade, has said in the news that she purchased $400 of wine at the vineyard and he expected her, like most of his clients, to pay by card, but she pulled out $400 in cash and clearly had more on her at the time, to pay for the wine. When he commented that it was unusual, she said that she always pays cash. She has also said she reimburses her dates for expenses because she does not want to be beholden to any man.

In any event, for her to be taken off the case, the defense attorney would need to prove, not circumstantially, but with actual evidence, that she actually benefitted from the money that was paid to Nathan Wade. The timeline of when they began their romance is a red herring, while it is a conflict of interest, it does not show an actual benefit that Fani Willis received from hiring Nathan Wade.

So, unless Ashley Merchant can show actual evidence and not circumstantial evidence of a financial benefit, there is insufficient grounds to remove either of them from the case.

If the factual evidence, cell phone records, contradicts the testimony given by Willis and Wade then nothing more needs to be proven. In that case not only will they be disqualified from the case they will most likely be removed from the Georgia bar.

And be charged for multiple counts of perjury, misuse of federal funds and misuse of State/County funds, honest services fraud, embezzlment, campaign finance violations, money laundering, tax evasion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The US legal system is based upon the presumption of innocence. Courts are not supposed to use circumstantial evidence to convict. In this case, Ashley Merchant, lawyer representing Michael Roman, would need to present actual evidence of the inappropriate use of funds. So far, the evidence is circumstantial. Nathan Wade purchased tickets for a trip that Fani Willis went on. Willis has countered that she reimbursed him in cash using funds leftover from her last campaign where she loaned her campaign $50K and then kept leftover unused money in cash at home. There is documented evidence that she took out the $50K to loan to her campaign, which suggests she would have the cash at home to pay for the travel tickets. A vendor in Napa Valley, one of the places that she traveled with Wade, has said in the news that she purchased $400 of wine at the vineyard and he expected her, like most of his clients, to pay by card, but she pulled out $400 in cash and clearly had more on her at the time, to pay for the wine. When he commented that it was unusual, she said that she always pays cash. She has also said she reimburses her dates for expenses because she does not want to be beholden to any man.

In any event, for her to be taken off the case, the defense attorney would need to prove, not circumstantially, but with actual evidence, that she actually benefitted from the money that was paid to Nathan Wade. The timeline of when they began their romance is a red herring, while it is a conflict of interest, it does not show an actual benefit that Fani Willis received from hiring Nathan Wade.

So, unless Ashley Merchant can show actual evidence and not circumstantial evidence of a financial benefit, there is insufficient grounds to remove either of them from the case.

Are you an attorney?
First of all.... the bolded is blatantly false.
And, Judge McAfee said a few weeks ago that it’s "clear that disqualification can occur if evidence is produced demonstrating an actual conflict or the appearance of one."
So, all it takes is the *appearance" of a conflict.

[Anonymous]

Unfortunately the cell phone records will only show a radius of where the phone could be pinged. For those asking where else he could have at those hours... google ATL strip clubs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Unfortunately the cell phone records will only show a radius of where the phone could be pinged. For those asking where else he could have at those hours... google ATL strip clubs.

It will be interesting if they use this as a defense, given the following.....

In court proceedings, Fulton County DA Fani Willis argues that the Atlanta Police Department's cell phone tracking software, in use since 2017, cannot "prove anything relevant" and provides "little evidentiary value."

Under DA Fani Willis' jurisdiction, the Atlanta Police Department has utilized Hawk Analytics' "CellHawk" software since 2017.

This very software documented Nathan Wade's alleged visits to Fani Willis' home 35 times before the purported beginning of their affair.

In a recent court filing, Willis argues that CellHawk's software fails to establish "anything relevant" and provides "little evidentiary value."

She further contends that CellHawk does not confirm "Special Prosecutor Wade's presence at any particular location or address."

According to Willis, CellHawk merely indicates that "Special Prosecutor Wade's telephone was located somewhere within a densely populated multiple-mile radius where various residences, restaurants, bars, nightclubs, and other businesses are located."

Does Fulton County DA Fani Willis maintain that the cellphone tracking software used by the Atlanta Police Department fails to "prove anything relevant" and offers "little evidentiary value"?

Since the adoption of CellHawk by the Atlanta Police Department in 2017, has the Fulton County District Attorney's office utilized this software to prosecute any cases?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The US legal system is based upon the presumption of innocence. Courts are not supposed to use circumstantial evidence to convict. In this case, Ashley Merchant, lawyer representing Michael Roman, would need to present actual evidence of the inappropriate use of funds. So far, the evidence is circumstantial. Nathan Wade purchased tickets for a trip that Fani Willis went on. Willis has countered that she reimbursed him in cash using funds leftover from her last campaign where she loaned her campaign $50K and then kept leftover unused money in cash at home. There is documented evidence that she took out the $50K to loan to her campaign, which suggests she would have the cash at home to pay for the travel tickets. A vendor in Napa Valley, one of the places that she traveled with Wade, has said in the news that she purchased $400 of wine at the vineyard and he expected her, like most of his clients, to pay by card, but she pulled out $400 in cash and clearly had more on her at the time, to pay for the wine. When he commented that it was unusual, she said that she always pays cash. She has also said she reimburses her dates for expenses because she does not want to be beholden to any man.

In any event, for her to be taken off the case, the defense attorney would need to prove, not circumstantially, but with actual evidence, that she actually benefitted from the money that was paid to Nathan Wade. The timeline of when they began their romance is a red herring, while it is a conflict of interest, it does not show an actual benefit that Fani Willis received from hiring Nathan Wade.

So, unless Ashley Merchant can show actual evidence and not circumstantial evidence of a financial benefit, there is insufficient grounds to remove either of them from the case.

She is not on trial, and would not be convicted of anything. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is not the standard here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unfortunately the cell phone records will only show a radius of where the phone could be pinged. For those asking where else he could have at those hours... google ATL strip clubs.

It will be interesting if they use this as a defense, given the following.....

In court proceedings, Fulton County DA Fani Willis argues that the Atlanta Police Department's cell phone tracking software, in use since 2017, cannot "prove anything relevant" and provides "little evidentiary value."

Under DA Fani Willis' jurisdiction, the Atlanta Police Department has utilized Hawk Analytics' "CellHawk" software since 2017.

This very software documented Nathan Wade's alleged visits to Fani Willis' home 35 times before the purported beginning of their affair.

In a recent court filing, Willis argues that CellHawk's software fails to establish "anything relevant" and provides "little evidentiary value."

She further contends that CellHawk does not confirm "Special Prosecutor Wade's presence at any particular location or address."

According to Willis, CellHawk merely indicates that "Special Prosecutor Wade's telephone was located somewhere within a densely populated multiple-mile radius where various residences, restaurants, bars, nightclubs, and other businesses are located."

Does Fulton County DA Fani Willis maintain that the cellphone tracking software used by the Atlanta Police Department fails to "prove anything relevant" and offers "little evidentiary value"?

Since the adoption of CellHawk by the Atlanta Police Department in 2017, has the Fulton County District Attorney's office utilized this software to prosecute any cases?

In this particular instance, the cell phone information provided 2 cell phone towers for location triangulation - accurate triangulation requires 3 cell phone towers. So it is likely that he was somewhere in a large geographic zone - that includes both Willis's apartment and many other places including bars that are open late.

In other words, little evidentiary value.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When will Georgia decide whether or not Willis is disqualified?

It would be preferable to get beyond this side circus Trump has created and proceed with his prosecution.

“All I need is for you to help me find 11,780 votes”

Because Trump presented more than 30,000 illegal votes.

[Anonymous]

The GA AG should now charge Willis and Wade with perjury etc., and Trump and his co-defendants should file a civil lawsuit over his civil rights being violated by Wade & Willis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unfortunately the cell phone records will only show a radius of where the phone could be pinged. For those asking where else he could have at those hours... google ATL strip clubs.

It will be interesting if they use this as a defense, given the following.....

In court proceedings, Fulton County DA Fani Willis argues that the Atlanta Police Department's cell phone tracking software, in use since 2017, cannot "prove anything relevant" and provides "little evidentiary value."

Under DA Fani Willis' jurisdiction, the Atlanta Police Department has utilized Hawk Analytics' "CellHawk" software since 2017.

This very software documented Nathan Wade's alleged visits to Fani Willis' home 35 times before the purported beginning of their affair.

In a recent court filing, Willis argues that CellHawk's software fails to establish "anything relevant" and provides "little evidentiary value."

She further contends that CellHawk does not confirm "Special Prosecutor Wade's presence at any particular location or address."

According to Willis, CellHawk merely indicates that "Special Prosecutor Wade's telephone was located somewhere within a densely populated multiple-mile radius where various residences, restaurants, bars, nightclubs, and other businesses are located."

Does Fulton County DA Fani Willis maintain that the cellphone tracking software used by the Atlanta Police Department fails to "prove anything relevant" and offers "little evidentiary value"?

Since the adoption of CellHawk by the Atlanta Police Department in 2017, has the Fulton County District Attorney's office utilized this software to prosecute any cases?

In this particular instance, the cell phone information provided 2 cell phone towers for location triangulation - accurate triangulation requires 3 cell phone towers. So it is likely that he was somewhere in a large geographic zone - that includes both Willis's apartment and many other places including bars that are open late.

In other words, little evidentiary value.

Ok then. Thousands of defendants convicted by Fulton Co. DA's office using CellHawk system since 2017 must be freed!

DA and Fani (since 2021) used cellphone records that is of "little evidentiary value" for all those convictions according to Fani.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unfortunately the cell phone records will only show a radius of where the phone could be pinged. For those asking where else he could have at those hours... google ATL strip clubs.

It will be interesting if they use this as a defense, given the following.....

In court proceedings, Fulton County DA Fani Willis argues that the Atlanta Police Department's cell phone tracking software, in use since 2017, cannot "prove anything relevant" and provides "little evidentiary value."

Under DA Fani Willis' jurisdiction, the Atlanta Police Department has utilized Hawk Analytics' "CellHawk" software since 2017.

This very software documented Nathan Wade's alleged visits to Fani Willis' home 35 times before the purported beginning of their affair.

In a recent court filing, Willis argues that CellHawk's software fails to establish "anything relevant" and provides "little evidentiary value."

She further contends that CellHawk does not confirm "Special Prosecutor Wade's presence at any particular location or address."

According to Willis, CellHawk merely indicates that "Special Prosecutor Wade's telephone was located somewhere within a densely populated multiple-mile radius where various residences, restaurants, bars, nightclubs, and other businesses are located."

Does Fulton County DA Fani Willis maintain that the cellphone tracking software used by the Atlanta Police Department fails to "prove anything relevant" and offers "little evidentiary value"?

Since the adoption of CellHawk by the Atlanta Police Department in 2017, has the Fulton County District Attorney's office utilized this software to prosecute any cases?

In this particular instance, the cell phone information provided 2 cell phone towers for location triangulation - accurate triangulation requires 3 cell phone towers. So it is likely that he was somewhere in a large geographic zone - that includes both Willis's apartment and many other places including bars that are open late.

In other words, little evidentiary value.

Ok then. Thousands of defendants convicted by Fulton Co. DA's office using CellHawk system since 2017 must be freed!

DA and Fani (since 2021) used cellphone records that is of "little evidentiary value" for all those convictions according to Fani.

Can you tell me if those other cases had 2 or 3 cell phone towers for locational triangulation? Do you know?

Also, did you know that it is respectful to not refer to a woman by only her first name? First and last name is an acceptable convention to indicate that the person is female, if you prefer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Unfortunately the cell phone records will only show a radius of where the phone could be pinged. For those asking where else he could have at those hours... google ATL strip clubs.

Sure. He visited a strip club on Sept. 11 for nearly 5 hours then texted his lover as soon as he arrived home.
Then, on Nov. 29, he received a call from Fani at around midnight then hustled right over to a strip club and remained there for over 4 hours.
Totally believable. /s

From the court filing:

[0]n September 11, 2021, Mr. Wade's phone left the Doraville area
and arrived within the geofence located on the Dogwood address at
10:45 P.M. The phone remained there until September 12 at 3:28 A.M.
at which time the phone traveled directly to towers located in East Cobb
consistent with his routine pinging at his residence in that area. The
phone arrived in East Cobb at approximately 4:05 A.M., and records
demonstrate he sent a text at 4:20 A.M. to Ms. Willis.

[0]n November 29, 2021, Mr. Wade's phone was pinging on the East
Cobb towers near his residence and, following a call from Ms. Willis
[more accurately, from Mr. Willis's phone] at 11:32 P.M., while the
call continued, his phone left the East Cobb area just after midnight
and arrived within the geofence located on the Dogwood address at
12:43 A.M on November 30, 2021. The phone remained there until 4:55
A.M.

[Anonymous]

They could just as easily "prove" he was paying for dances. People on the other side of America who don't know ATL are grasping at straws

https://www.thrillist.com/sex-dating/atlanta/why-atlanta-is-the-strip-club-capital-of-america