The explosive court filing alleges that Ms. Willis and her appointed Special Prosecutor Nathan Wade (who is helping direct the prosecution of these matters) have been having an affair and have, in effect, been using the controversial prosecutions to improperly convert tax monies (upwards of $1 million) for their personal use and benefit. The filing alleges ethics violations and potential criminal violations of state and federal law. The defense team for defendant Michael Roman also asks the court to dismiss the indictment and disqualify Willis, Wade and their offices from any further involvement in the prosecution. It would be no surprise, given the obvious political abuse of power in these "get Trump" prosecutions, that there would also be base personal corruption by the Democratic politician and her "special prosecutor." The introduction of the astonishing legal brief that could very well upend all these prosecutions follows: "The instant Motion is not filed lightly. Nor is it being filed without considerable forethought, research or investigation. Nonetheless, this Motion must be heard, as the issues raised herein strike at the heart of fairness in our justice system and, if left unaddressed and unchecked, threaten to taint the entire prosecution, invite error, and completely undermine public confidence in the eventual outcome of this proceeding.There are fewer positions of authority in Georgia’s justice system more powerful than an elected district attorney. The district attorney has incredible control and influence over the entire criminal judicial process, including the power to decide who and when to charge and how to charge them, which cases will get tried and which cases will be resolved, and, importantly the power to allocate public monies provided for the operation of the district attorney’s office. Historically, there have been few checks on this power in Georgia, and district attorneys have largely been able to act with broad discretion in deciding how to utilize public monies and making prosecutorial decisions.This case presents a unique opportunity for this Court to review this authority and determine if the district attorney here overstepped her legal discretion and authority and whether she and the special prosecutor violated the law and their obligations under the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct when they engaged in a personal, romantic relationship that has ultimately yielded substantial income to the special prosecutor. The important issues raised in the instant Motion suggest that the elected district attorney for the largest district attorney’s office in the State of Georgia has used the instant prosecution to pay her partner a large sum of money that was originally allotted to clear the backlog of cases in Fulton County following the Covid pandemic.Normally, the district attorney’s use of funds allotted pursuant to a county’s prior approval would not be newsworthy or legally actionable. But this case is different. The district attorney sought additional funds from Fulton County to clear the Covid backlog, including making a detailed presentation to the Board of Commissioners in 2021, and she ultimately received that funding from Fulton County. But she has not used those funds for that purpose. She apparently has used them to prosecute this case. Even assuming that were proper and could be forgiven, even within the contours of this prosecution, there is a separate and very important concern about her use of the money. As the layers unfold, it becomes clear that the district attorney and the special prosecutor have been profiting personally from this prosecution at Fulton County’s expense. Instead of handling this case within her office, as she could have done given the influx of Covid money, she chose to hire a private special prosecutor to preside over the case. Once again, on its face, this is not earth-shattering, and generally well within her discretion—but there are several important facts that distinguish this case from the typical one, and which render the indictment invalid as a matter of law.Under Georgia law, the district attorney was required to obtain Fulton County’s approval prior to appointing the special prosecutor to work on the case. The reason for this requirement is simple; it ensures that the district attorney cannot act unilaterally with regard to public monies and is subject to the control and supervision of the governing body, i.e., Fulton County so that public has confidence in how the money is used. Undersigned counsel has found no evidence that the district attorney sought or received such approval to appoint the special prosecutor from Fulton County. This is not a mere technicality. It is a requirement the Georgia Supreme Court has held must be followed when a special prosecutor is appointed, and, therefore, a prerequisite for any special prosecutor’s work on a case including the instant case.Since the district attorney was fully capable of asking for authority for additional funding following the pandemic, then it is clear she knows how to do that. So that begs the question of why she did not do so with regard to the approval for the special prosecutor in this case.
Continued next post......