Search
Close this search box.
Search
Close this search box.

CNN’s Elie Honig claims that Fani Willis did a poor job as a lawyer after a judge dismisses charges against Trump

CNN Senior Legal Analyst Elie Honig alleged that Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis and her team engaged in “bad lawyering” while crafting their indictment against former President Donald Trump and his co-defendants.

CNN Senior Legal Analyst Elie Honig alleged that Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis and her team engaged in “bad lawyering” while crafting their indictment against former President Donald Trump and his co-defendants.

On Wednesday, Judge Scott McAfee tossed six charges against Trump and his co-defendants, whom Willis is prosecuting under the state’s RICO statute after Trump tried to overturn the 2020 election results in Georgia. Trump still faces 10 felony counts in the case. He is under criminal indictment in three other jurisdictions.

“As written, these six counts contain all the essential elements of the crimes but fail to allege sufficient detail regarding the nature of their commission, i.e., the underlying felony solicited,” McAfee wrote.

During Wednesday’s edition of The Lead, Jake Tapper asked Honig to explain the decision. Honig said:

So, Jake, the very fundamental purpose of an indictment is to serve notice to notify the defendant, “Here is what you are charged with doing that was illegal.” And in this case, the six charges – they all relate to a sort of unusual Georgia law that makes it a crime to ask a public official to violate his oath of office.

The way those charges are charged in the indictment here, it says, “Well, the defendants tried to get certain Georgia public officials to violate the Constitution.” And the judge said, “That’s not specific enough because there are dozens, if not hundreds, of separate provisions in the Constitution. So, you haven’t adequately informed the defendants what actual crime they are specifically being charged with.”

That’s why the judge, threw out those six counts.

Tapper responded by asking, “Could they have been written in such a way that they would have stood this test?”

“Absolutely,” Honig replied. “And quite easily.” He stated that prosecutors could have cited the Constitution’s equal protection provisions. Tapper seemed perplexed at the apparent oversight.

“So, is it just bad lawyering?” the host asked. “I don’t understand.”

Honig replied:

It is bad lawyering. That’s exactly what it is…

This dismissal will not change the broad contours of the case, will not really change the evidence that prosecutors can use. But the D.A.’s office, prosecutors, they’re the ones who control the indictment. They’re the ones who drafted. The D.A.’s office is the one who’s been telling us, “This is the most important indictment we’ve ever seen. This indictment will vindicate the cause of democracy.”

Yet they make an amateurish error like this, an unforced error. That’s entirely on them. And I think it undermines their credibility, their competency, and the seriousness of this office.”

Watch above via CNN.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments