Unproven claims and 'unprofessional' witnesses: How judge arrived at DA Fani Willis ruling
Before the judge's epic ruling Friday, there were nine weeks of contentious court battles and "he said-she said" legal motions over whether Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis could stay on the sweeping election fraud case against former President Donald Trump given her romantic relationship with her top prosecutor.
In the end, Judge Scott McAfee's decision to allow Willis to stay ? as long as she fired special prosecutor Nathan Wade ? came down to what was said on the witness stand, including by Willis herself. Rather than vindicating her, the judge sharply criticized Willis for creating such a strong appearance of conflict of interest that either she and her entire office, or her former boyfriend, had to go.
He also chastised her for "unprofessional" outbursts on the witness stand.
Wade resigned Friday afternoon.
More: Fani Willis can stay on Georgia Trump case if she fires special prosecutor
"Without sufficient evidence that the District Attorney acquired a personal stake in the prosecution, or that her financial arrangements had any impact on the case, the Defendants’ claims of an actual conflict must be denied," McAfee ruled. But he added: "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."
Willis hasn't commented.
Here's how we got to the judge's decision that spares Willis the crisis of losing the Trump case entirely but forces her to cut loose Wade, a man she has described at various times as a friend, a mentor, a lover ? and the leader of the election racketeering case that could significantly influence Trump's legal and political future.
More: Nathan Wade resigns as Trump special prosecutor, saving Fani Willis' Georgia election case
Fani Willis and Nathan Wade affair: What was said in court
The effort to disqualify Willis has been closely watched by state, national and even international legal observers because it is one of only two of Trump’s legal battles to focus on his efforts to overturn his 2020 election defeat.
The drama began on Jan. 8, when longtime Trump associate and co-defendant Michael Roman alleged in a motion seeking dismissal of the case that Willis was having an affair with the then-married Wade before hiring him Nov. 1, 2021.
Roman ? and later Trump and other defendants ? accused Willis of essentially filing and then prolonging the investigation so she could continue to benefit financially from her relationship with Wade. They alleged that he spent some of the more than $650,000 he's received as prosecutor to take Willis on romantic trips to places like California wine country and the Caribbean.
Over three days of combative testimony before McAfee, defense lawyers called Willis and Wade liars, conniving cheaters and "lovestruck teenagers." They also accused them of playing the race card to cover up their misdeeds and of milking the “gravy train” of the Trump election fraud case.
More: 'Lies': Fani Willis fights push to remove her from Donald Trump Georgia case
Willis and Wade denied those accusations, testifying that their romantic relationship started months after he was hired, not before. Both testified that Willis hired Wade on the merits of his background and accomplishments, not because of cronyism or hidden financial interest.
And both insisted that Willis paid her share of expenses for the trips, including by repaying Wade in cash for some of the costs ? even as they acknowledged there were no receipts to prove it.
Defense lawyers argued Willis improperly benefited, even if she did repay Wade all the money, which they also dispute.
Judge Scott McAfee: An 'odor of mendacity' hangs over the case
In his ruling Friday, McAfee strongly indicated that he didn't fully believe Willis and Wade when they claimed their relationship started only after she hired him as special assistant district attorney.
Saying that "an odor of mendacity remains," McAfee wrote that he was not under an obligation "to ferret out every instance of potential dishonesty from each witness or defendant ever presented in open court."
"Yet reasonable questions about whether the District Attorney and her hand-selected lead SADA 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," he wrote.
Read It: Fani Willis decision: Read the judge's scathing ruling on Willis in Trump election fraud case
McAfee was also deeply skeptical of claims by Willis and Wade that she repaid him ? entirely in cash ? for all of the money he spent on their various vacations.
"As the case moves forward, reasonable members of the public could easily be 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 ruled. "Put differently, an outsider could reasonably think that the District Attorney is not exercising her independent professional judgment totally free of any compromising influences. As long as Wade remains on the case, this unnecessary perception will persist."
Willis and Wade both testified they ended their relationship last year.
A clash over a purported 'star witness'
In a win for Willis, McAfee said he didn't place a lot of stock in the testimony of a former law firm partner and divorce lawyer for Wade, Terrence Bradley.
Roman's defense lawyer, Ashleigh Merchant, described Bradley as a key eyewitness who would testify that Wade told him the Willis affair started years before they claimed ? directly contradicting the district attorney's sworn statements.
But when Bradley was finally forced to take the stand, he said he could not remember key details of what Wade allegedly told him about his relationship with Willis. Bradley also said he was just speculating when he texted Merchant to say the Willis-Wade affair began sometime in 2019.
"His inconsistencies, demeanor, and generally non-responsive answers left far too brittle a foundation upon which to build any conclusions," McAfee said.
More: Bombshell witness? A look at the man who may know all the secrets in the Fani Willis Trump drama
A second witness called by defense lawyers, Robin Yearti, was equally unhelpful in convincing the judge that Willis and Wade began their affair before she hired him. The testimony by Yearti, a former Willis friend and employee of the district attorney's office, did raise doubts about the Willis' assertions, McAfee noted.
But ultimately, he wrote, it "lacked context and detail." As a result, even after the defense proffered cellphone records suggesting Wade made late-night visits to Willis' residence, "neither side was able to conclusively establish by a preponderance of the evidence when the relationship evolved into a romantic one."
An Atlanta church speech, and an 'unprofessional' district attorney
In the end, Willis didn't help her case when testifying, especially by lashing out at defense lawyers and calling them liars.
McAfee singled out the "unprofessional manner of the District Attorney’s testimony during the evidentiary hearing."
More: Why Nathan Wade, under fire for alleged affair with Fani Willis, is facing new scrutiny
And he criticized her for a much-publicized speech at an Atlanta church in January in which Willis claimed she and Wade were being singled out for scrutiny and criticism because they are Black.
"The effect of this speech was to cast racial aspersions at an indicted Defendant’s decision to file this pretrial motion," McAfee ruled.
Willis' comments didn't rise to the level of denying Roman, Trump and the other 13 defendants a fair trial, McAfee wrote. "But it was still legally improper."
This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Fani Willis ruling on Trump case: What to know
