- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Judge Scott McAfee is ruling on Fani Willis disqualification tomorrow
Posted on 3/15/24 at 8:12 am to wfallstiger
Posted on 3/15/24 at 8:12 am to wfallstiger
Oh, and no way Fani steps down. She will fire Wade.
Her ego is too big. She will go all in scorched earth
Her ego is too big. She will go all in scorched earth
0
Posted on 3/15/24 at 8:12 am to laxtonto
quote:
laxtonto
Classic let both sides "win".
Lets her stay but Wade must step down to do so...
Unfortunately, I think this was all he could do. I hope Willis faces consequences outside of this case.
Posted on 3/15/24 at 8:14 am to wfallstiger
Can these 2 sorry POS be prosecuted regardless of what the judge rules?
Posted on 3/15/24 at 8:14 am to Lsut81
quote:
And a this begs a question... if there was enough evidence to disqualify one of the two, why not both?
The ruling hasn't been posted yet, but an article I read said they had to choose between either:
1. Full recusal of her office
2. Replacing Wade, which would remove the impropriety at issue
I imagine this is going to be along the lines of their personal relationship more than the financial stuff.
Posted on 3/15/24 at 8:15 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
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. Rather, it is the undersigned’s opinion that Georgia law does not permit the finding of an actual conflict for simply making bad choices – even repeatedly - and it is the trial court’s duty to confine itself to the relevant issues and applicable law properly brought before it. Other forums or sources of authority such as the General Assembly, the Georgia State Ethics Commission, the State Bar of Georgia, the Fulton County Board of Commissioners, or the voters of Fulton County may offer feedback on any unanswered questions that linger. But those are not the issues determinative to the Defendants’ motions alleging an actual conflict.
Posted on 3/15/24 at 8:15 am to plazadweller
quote:
Can these 2 sorry POS be prosecuted regardless of what the judge rules?
Whats funny is Kemp just put that oversight of DAs back in motion.
Collusion?
McAfee saves face, does something, but not full stop.
Fani fires Wade
Kemp's Committee goes after Fani and punishes her
Case is dropped
Posted on 3/15/24 at 8:15 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
2. Replacing Wade, which would remove the impropriety at issue
And how will that address her perjuring herself?
Posted on 3/15/24 at 8:16 am to Dday63
quote:
Unfortunately, I think this was all he could do. I hope Willis faces consequences outside of this case.
Based on what I've read, she's not a serious person so its just a matter of time.
Posted on 3/15/24 at 8:16 am to plazadweller
Yes, but who would is another matter
Posted on 3/15/24 at 8:16 am to laxtonto
quote:
Other forums or sources of authority such as the General Assembly, the Georgia State Ethics Commission, the State Bar of Georgia, the Fulton County Board of Commissioners, or the voters of Fulton County may offer feedback on any unanswered questions that linger.
Sounds like my first post ITT
quote:
Georgia law does not permit the finding of an actual conflict for simply making bad choices – even repeatedly - and it is the trial court’s duty to confine itself to the relevant issues and applicable law properly brought before it.
Yeah I think the law is much more restrictive than what people on here imagine it to be, which is a common theme.
Posted on 3/15/24 at 8:16 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I imagine this is going to be along the lines of their personal relationship more than the financial stuff
yeah, but what about the lying under oath and on court documents?
No way if she does get a conviction, this survives an appeal.
Posted on 3/15/24 at 8:17 am to idlewatcher
quote:
And how will that address her perjuring herself?
Has nothing to do with this motion/ruling.
That has to be argued in a separate proceeding (be it criminal, professional/ethics-related, recall, etc.)
Posted on 3/15/24 at 8:18 am to Lsut81
quote:
but what about the lying under oath and on court documents?
Has no bearing on this particular motion.
That stuff has to be argued in a separate proceeding.
The lying, within this suit, is nothing more than a credibility issue for their testimony.
Posted on 3/15/24 at 8:20 am to SlowFlowPro
Trust Willis
Posted on 3/15/24 at 8:21 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
That would be in a different proceeding later.
Well of course, I think most understand that it would be a different proceeding. But her being disqualified from continuing this case would imply that she can eat shite for being a lying nasty c u n t.
Posted on 3/15/24 at 8:21 am to SlowFlowPro
Just heard somewhere in the ruling the judge says the billing of hours was not an issue...
SFP or other lawyers, everything I saw you all say during this was what he was doing was egregious?
SFP or other lawyers, everything I saw you all say during this was what he was doing was egregious?
Posted on 3/15/24 at 8:23 am to Lsut81
quote:
SFP or other lawyers, everything I saw you all say during this was what he was doing was egregious?
Again, for purposes of this motion, it's probably irrelevant.
For purposes of an ethical inquiry? I would have tight butthole syndrome if that were my billing.
Posted on 3/15/24 at 8:27 am to laxtonto
quote:It would have been fun to have seen a public quartering or burning but it appears GA law did not allow for that, in this case.
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. Rather, it is the undersigned’s opinion that Georgia law does not permit the finding of an actual conflict for simply making bad choices – even repeatedly - and it is the trial court’s duty to confine itself to the relevant issues and applicable law properly brought before it. Other forums or sources of authority such as the General Assembly, the Georgia State Ethics Commission, the State Bar of Georgia, the Fulton County Board of Commissioners, or the voters of Fulton County may offer feedback on any unanswered questions that linger. But those are not the issues determinative to the Defendants’ motions alleging an actual conflict.
However and notwithstanding any follow-on consequences, this finding statement is, in and of itself, damning and ruinous on its face...
Posted on 3/15/24 at 8:29 am to Dday63
quote:
But she and Wade cannot be removed from the case without showing a direct conflict of interest, and I'm just not sure a financial gain creates that conflict...otherwise a DA would never be able to hire a special prosecutor.
Not necessarily, just as long as the DA isn't fricking and taking trips with the special prosecutor hired.
Posted on 3/15/24 at 8:29 am to SlowFlowPro
More curious to me is that if Wade is kicked from the money train, how does his ex-wife react and how vicious does that set of proceedings become?
If he is no longer the special prosecutor there is no reason to try and seal or hide any motions in this case and no reason to stop depositions regarding Wade's involvement with Willis. With no potential gravy train to protect, the preliminary settlement talks are more about getting a huge chunk of current assets, not the potential cash flow from being the special prosecutor longterm.
So no need to try and "help" Wade knowing that in Georgia proof of infidelity is weighed in the division of property...
If he is no longer the special prosecutor there is no reason to try and seal or hide any motions in this case and no reason to stop depositions regarding Wade's involvement with Willis. With no potential gravy train to protect, the preliminary settlement talks are more about getting a huge chunk of current assets, not the potential cash flow from being the special prosecutor longterm.
So no need to try and "help" Wade knowing that in Georgia proof of infidelity is weighed in the division of property...
Page 4 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News