On Friday afternoon, Terrence Bradley, a star witness for the defense team in the trial against Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, revealed late in questioning that he was accused of sexual assault by someone at the law firm at which he was a partner, along with special prosecutor Nathan Wade, who Willis allegedly had an “inappropriate” affair with and who was hired by Willis to prosecute former President Donald Trump.
In questioning by state attorney Anna Cross, Bradley admitted that a large reason he left the law firm was because an employee at the firm accused him of sexual assault, though he denied the allegation. He also admitted that he paid the employee who accused him.
This directly contradicts an earlier part of Bradley’s testimony, in which he claimed that he left the firm because of a reason relating to Wade’s divorce proceedings and was therefore covered under attorney-client privilege, as Bradley served as Wade’s divorce lawyer for a time.
Judge Scott McAfee said that the admission reopens questions about what Bradley refused to answer, relating to what he knew of Wade and Willis’ romantic relationship and when he knew, as he previously refused to answer citing attorney-client privilege.
“Mr. Bradley previously testified that the reason he left the firm was totally and completely covered by privilege. When asked by the state, he went into a factual scenario that, to my mind, I don’t see how it relates to privilege at all. And so now I’m left wondering if Mr. Bradley has been properly interpreting privilege this entire time,” the judge said.
McAfee said he would schedule an in-camera hearing with Bradley to determine matters of privilege in the testimony.
The core of the case revolves around Willis’ decision to hire Wade as special prosecutor in her case against Trump.
Michael Roman, one of the defendants in the Trump case, filed a legal motion alleging that the decision was influenced by Willis’ personal relationship with Wade, calling into question the integrity of the case.
Willis vehemently refuted these claims in court, labeling the motion as “dishonest” and “extremely offensive.”
Scroll down to leave a comment and share your thoughts.
Leave a Comment