JUDICIAL THINKING

I sometimes wonder about the process of thinking in the United States of America. In particular the thinking related to the prosecution of Mr Trump and a number of co-defendants.

In the indictment by the state of Georgia, the state wrote: “Trump and the other defendants charged in this indictment refused to accept that Trump lost, and they knowingly and wilfully joined a conspiracy to unlawfully change the outcome of the election in favour of Trump. That conspiracy contained a common plan and purpose to commit two or more acts of racketeering activity.”

The group, the state charges, “constituted a criminal organization whose members and associates engaged in various related criminal activities including, but not limited to, false statements and writings, impersonating a public officer, forgery, filing false documents, influencing witnesses, computer theft, computer trespass, computer invasion of privacy, conspiracy to defraud the state, acts involving theft, and perjury”

Part of the evidence against him and his co-defendants revolves around and incident on the 2^nd January 2021, when in a recorded telephone call, Mr Trump asked Brad Reffensperger, a Republican serving as Georgia’s top election official, to overturn the election by stating “All I want to do is this. I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have because we won the state”. Mr Raffensperger refused.

The Fulton County District Attorney, Fani Willis, prosecuting the case, has already obtained convictions of some of the co-defendants in the case who have pleaded guilty to some charges. Scott Hall, Sidney Powell, Jenna Ellis and Kenneth Chesebro have all made plea deals with the prosecution..

We have had a hearing for the last few weeks over the suitability of the Ms Willis to continue prosecuting the case because of a relationship with another prosecuting lawyer involved in the case. There in nothing about this relationship that has anything to do with the evidence against the defendants. It is solely an attack on the character of the individuals concerned with the prosecution and NOTHING to do with the evidence against the defendants. I repeat NOTHING to do with the case against the defendants.

The Judge, Scott McAfee, overseeing the case, has been listening to ridiculous evidence concerning Ms Willis and has now stated that there was an “appearance of impropriety” and that either Ms Willis or Mr Wade (the other prosecutor) should leave the case to resolve that. The claim was that their behaviour had compromised the integrity of the case. The judge disagreed yet still went on about appearances. In what way? As stated before, four defendants have pleaded guilty without Ms Willis and Mr Wade’s affair causing any distraction or loss of integrity.

The insanity of the claim is overwhelmingly obvious to anyone reading about the case or listening to this charade playing out. The defence lawyers had argued that Ms Willis should be disqualified because her relationship with Mr Wade, whom she had hired, had compromised the integrity of the case. How a personal relationship has anything to do with the case against the defendants is a mystery. What has a personal relationship got to do with the evidence against the defendants?  In what way does an affair between Ms Willis and Mr Wade affect examination of the evidence against the defendants for conspiring to commit acts of racketeering in Fulton County, in the State of Georgia? I repeat myself  as I am baffled.

If there is any impropriety, it is allowing the defence to even have a hearing about their contention that it does. The failure of the Judge to take a firm hand and give short shrift to the hypocrisy of the defence’s proposition makes one very concerned about his ability to conduct a trial where the defence will do anything to try to divert attention from the facts in evidence. Mt Trump and his co-defendants behaved like gangsters and are continuing to do so at every opportunity. It is so glaringly obvious to the rest of the world, yet, apparently not to the citizens of the United States of America, and worryingly not to the judiciary either. When are the courts going to actually take serious decisive action against the chicanery of Trump and Co.?