Posted on 02/02/2024 7:00:35 AM PST by Red Badger
Michael Roman, one of the co-defendants of former President Donald Trump in the RICO case brought against Trump and 18 members of his 2020 campaign and legal teams by DA Fani Willis, just escalated his fight with DA Willis and special prosecutor Nathan Wade. He did so in a subpoena of Wade and Willis, among others, that was recently filed with the court.
As background, Roman is the member of the Trump 2020 Campaign who alleged in early January that Willis was having a romantic affair with special prosecutor Nathan Wade. In that filing, Roman’s legal team wrote that “Mr. Roman also moves the Court for an order disqualifying the district attorney, her office, and the special prosecutor from further prosecuting the instant matter on the grounds that the district attorney and the special prosecutor have been engaged in an improper, clandestine personal relationship during the pendency of this case, which has resulted in the special prosecutor, and, in turn, the district attorney, profiting significantly from this prosecution at the expense of the taxpayers.”
Continuing, his team wrote in that filing, “Accordingly, the district attorney and the special prosecutor have violated laws regulating the use of public monies, suffer from irreparable conflicts of interest, and have violated their oaths of office under the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct and should be disqualified from prosecuting this matter.”
His team has now escalated that fight with DA Willis and special prosecutor Wade by subpoenaing them. Announcing those subpoenas in a filing with the court, his team wrote, “COMES NOW, Defendant Michael Roman (“Mr. Roman”), by and through his undersigned counsel, pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 24-13-24 and show that service was made upon the following witnesses, as evidenced in the attached subpoenas, by certified mail with certification tracking number endorsed on the copy of the subpoenas. Mr. Roman hereby gives notice that all individuals listed on the attached subpoenas are witnesses he intends to call at his hearing on February 15, 2024.”
Continuing, the filing noted that one of those subpoenaed refused service of his subpoena. It noted, “Additionally, witness Thomas Ricks, an employee of the Fulton County District Attorney’s Office, may also be called as a witness but has refused service of his subpoena. A copy of his subpoena was emailed to him at his Fulton County official e-mail address. Additionally, since he refused service at his office at the Fulton County District Attorney’s Office on January 29, 2024 at 4:57pm, we have asked him to accept service. If not, then he will be personally served, and his return will be filed at that time.”
Explaining the filing in a post on X, Townhall columnist Phil Holloway wrote, “Trumo RICO C-Defendant Michael Roman officially serves subpoenas on 9 people, including #FaniWillis “special prosecutor” Nathan Wade for a hearing on 2-15-24 An additional DA’s employee, Thomas Ricks, is alleged to have refused service of his subpoena.”
DA Willis, for her part, has insisted that she did nothing wrong in hiring Wade to be one of the three special prosecutors and alleged that the criticism of her and Wade is coming not because of any wrongdoing, but because of racism. Watch her made that argument here:
VIDEO AT LINK.....................
Looks like The GirlBoss of Colour can’t handle the heat in the kitchen.
BTTT
Willis and Wade need to be charged as “Public Nuisances.”
Courts look broadly to evaluate whether an action by a party constitutes a nuisance, including whether the action unreasonably interferes with the morals, health, safety, and comfort of the affected parties (in this case taxpayers).
A public nuisance created in a public place or on public land,by public officials, affecting morals, safety, or health, and is considered an offense against the state. For example, operating a house of prostitution is a public nuisance.
Most public nuisances must be brought by government officials (elected officials) on behalf of the public.
Private citizens can bring a class action to enjoin the nuisance in some cases. A private individual can also bring a case on their own, but they must suffer a greater or different nuisance than the rest of the public.
REFERENCE-——nuisances.usalegal.gov
A public nuisance is a crime against the order and the economy of a state. The following is an example of a state statute explaining places and persons constituting the offense of public nuisance, for which a criminal prosecution can be initiated.
1. Every place: wherein any fighting between people or animals or birds shall be conducted; or
wherein any intoxicating liquors are kept for unlawful use, sale or distribution; where vagrants resort;
2. Every act unlawfully done and every omission to perform a duty, which act or omission that: annoy, injure or endanger the safety, health, comfort, or repose of any considerable number of persons; offend public decency; unlawfully interfere with, befoul, obstruct, or tend to obstruct, or render an area dangerous for passage, or in any way render a considerable number of persons insecure in life or the use of property.
3. Acts of public indecency, such as lewdness, exhibiting obscene pictures, being naked in a public place, prostitution, publication of an indecent book, all are indictable and punishable at common law because they outrage public decency and are injurious.
All common and public nuisances, which aggrieve, annoy, or impair the common good and the rights of the community must be punished criminally by indictment.
Counties, municipalities, and other governing bodies in the prosecution of governmental functions are liable for damages resulting from the operation and maintenance of nuisances.
In an action for a public nuisance, any evidence that tends to prove the defendant’s guilt of the offense charged is admissible. One need not have a criminal intent to make her/him guilty of committing a nuisance.
In an attempt to escape liability, a defendant can argue that a particular legislation authorizes his/her activity. However, but legislative authority will not excuse a defendant from liability when the conduct is unreasonable.
A defendant cannot escape liability by arguing that others also contributed to the harm.
When a state does not prescribe punishment for a particular nuisance, the punishment is the one prescribed by statute for common-law offenses. Additionally, a person convicted for maintaining a nuisance of a continuing character is generally ordered to abate the nuisance together with a fine and imprisonment.
Fani Willis was sure she and her minions were above the law b/c of their race.
The nano-second she was called out, she screamed “racism!”
Now she’s finding out that’s not working out as well as she thought it would.
They thought they were slick, settling the divorce before he could testify
He’s a divorce lawyer, not a criminal prosecutor................
He is a “former” prosecutor, as described in the link.
Interesting. The person prosecuting him has become a material witness. Which defacto removes them from the case.
No longer alleged but admitted; people in Fulton County are so easily fooled.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.