The response is the latest salvo in a battle that began in January when Trump co-defendant Michael Roman sought to disqualify Willis and her office. Defense attorneys argued that Willis’ romantic relationship with former special prosecutor Nathan Wade gave her a financial stake in the prosecution. They said Willis paid Wade’s firm hundreds of thousands of dollars, then benefited when Wade paid thousands of dollars for vacations the couple took to Aruba, Napa Valley and other locales.
The defense also said Willis’ comments on the weekend of the Rev. Martin Luther King’s birthday at a Black church — where she suggested the accusations of impropriety were racially motivated — amounted to “forensic misconduct” and should be disqualifying.
Willis and Wade argued they did nothing improper. In court filings and testimony, they said their romance began months after Willis hired Wade and ended last summer. And they said they split the cost of their travel roughly evenly, with Willis paying her share mostly in cash and receiving no financial benefit from the case.
In his ruling last month, McAfee found the defendants had not proved Willis’ relationship with Wade posed an actual conflict of interest. But he said an appearance of impropriety could continue to haunt the case. So, he gave Willis an ultimatum: Either drop Wade from the prosecution or see herself and her entire staff disqualified. Wade resigned that same day.
“Setting aside whether Wade’s removal from the case was in fact necessary, he withdrew from representation hours after the trial court issued its order and the district attorney accepted the resignation,” the DA’s office told the appeals court. “Accordingly, the trial court properly exercised its discretion and inherent authority in denying the motion to disqualify based on an appearance of impropriety.”
For this reason, there is no basis for the appeals court to hear the…
Read the full article here
