'Much bigger than Watergate': John Dean weighs in on Trump's Georgia indictment - CNN
Former Nixon White House counsel John Dean speaks with CNN’s Kaitlan Collins about the 41-count indictment charging former President Donald Trump and more than a dozen others for their roles in allegedly interfering with the 2020 election in Georgia
--------------------------------------------------- Read: The indictment against Trump in Georgia case
2020 Georgia Code Title 17 - Criminal Procedure Chapter 8 - Trial Article 1 - General Provisions § 17-8-4. Procedure for Trial of Jointly Indicted Defendants; Right of Defendants to Testify for or Against One Another; Order of Separate Trials; Acquittal or Conviction Where Offense Requires Joint Action or Concurrence; Number of Strikes Allowed Defendants Universal Citation: GA Code § 17-8-4 (2020) P - a) When two or more defendants are jointly indicted for a capital offense, any defendant so electing shall be separately tried unless the state shall waive the death penalty. When indicted for a capital felony when the death penalty is waived, or for a felony less than capital, or for a misdemeanor, such defendants may be tried jointly or separately in the discretion of the trial court. In any event, a jointly indicted defendant may testify for another jointly indicted defendant or on behalf of the state. When separate trials are ordered in any case, the defendants shall be tried in the order requested by the state. If the offense requires joint action and concurrence of two or more persons, acquittal or conviction of one defendant shall not operate as acquittal or conviction of others not tried. b) When two or more defendants are tried jointly for a crime or offense, such defendants shall be entitled to the same number of strikes as a single defendant if tried separately. The strikes shall be exercised jointly by the defendants or shall be apportioned among the defendants in the manner the court shall direct. In the event two or more defendants are tried jointly, the court, upon request of the defendants, shall allow an equal number of additional strikes to the defendants, not to exceed five each, as the court shall deem necessary, to the ends that justice may prevail. The court may allow the state additional strikes not to exceed the number of additional strikes as are allowed to the defendants. [...] It is well established that joinder of the codefendants is within the discretion of the trial court. Sheppard v. State, 205 Ga. App. 373, 422 S.E.2d 66 (1992). P - Whether to grant a motion to sever the trial of some of the defendants is within the discretion of the trial court and the appellants were required to do more that raise the possibility that a separate trial would have given the appellants a better chance of obtaining an acquittal. The test is whether the number of defendants will create confusion during the trial; whether the strength of the evidence against one defendant will engulf the others with a "spillover" effect; and whether the defendants' claims are antagonistic to each other's rights. Overton v. State, 295 Ga. App. 223, 671 S.E.2d 507 (2008), cert. denied, No. S09C0654, 2009 Ga. LEXIS 212 (Ga. 2009). Three factors for consideration on motion to sever. - In exercising the court's discretion on a motion to sever, the trial court must consider three factors: (1) whether the number of defendants creates confusion as to the law and evidence to be applied to each; (2) whether a danger exists that evidence admissible against one defendant might be considered against the other notwithstanding instructions to the contrary; and (3) whether the defenses are antagonistic to each other or each other's rights. Robinson v. State, 259 Ga. App. 555, 578 S.E.2d 214 (2003). Guilt or innocence of joint defendants must be separately determined. https://law.justia.com/codes/georgia/2020/title-17/chapter-8/article-1/section-17-8-4/
Sidney Powell followed Kenneth Chesebro in demanding a speedy trial, but neither defendant in the election interference case wanted to be tried with the other.
Judge Scott McAfee of Fulton County Superior Court in Atlanta hears motions on Wednesday from attorneys representing Kenneth Chesebro and Sidney Powell. Pool photo by Jason Getz
By Richard Fausset and Danny Hakim Richard Fausset reported from Atlanta and Danny Hakim from New York. Sept. 6, 2023
Two of Donald J. Trump’s co-defendants in the Georgia election-interference case will go to trial together on Oct. 23, a judge ruled on Wednesday. The defendants, Sidney Powell and Kenneth Chesebro, had asked to be tried separately from one another.
The ruling from Judge Scott McAfee of Fulton County Superior Court, however, is contingent on the case remaining in state court — a situation that could change if other defendants succeed at moving the case into a federal courtroom.
Fani T. Willis, the district attorney of Fulton County, is still holding out hope that all 19 defendants in the racketeering case can be tried together. One of her prosecutors said during a hearing on Wednesday that the state would take approximately four months to present its case, calling roughly 150 witnesses. That estimate does not include the time it would take to pick the jury.
But during the hearing, Judge McAfee said he remained “very skeptical” that a single trial for all 19 defendants could work. For one thing, some of the accused, including Ms. Powell and Mr. Chesebro, have invoked their right to a speedy trial while others have not.
The questions raised at the hearing underscore the tremendous logistical challenges prosecutors face in the racketeering case charging the former president and his allies with a multipronged effort to overturn the 2020 election results in Georgia. It is one of four criminal trials looming for Mr. Trump, the leading Republican presidential candidate in the 2024 election.
So far, since his indictment in the Georgia case, Mr. Trump’s only request has been to sever his case from those of his co-defendants who are seeking a speedy trial.
---- Takeaways From Trump’s Indictment in Georgia Card [4] of 4
A fourth criminal case. Former President Donald Trump was indicted for a fourth time on Aug. 14, this time over what prosecutors in Atlanta described as his efforts to unlawfully undo his election loss in Georgia in 2020. The indictment includes 13 charges against Trump, as well as charges against 18 of his allies. Here are some key takeaways:
Trump was charged under Georgia’s RICO Act. Prosecutors charged Trump and his allies under the state’s Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act, which allows them to link various crimes committed by different people by arguing that they were acting together for a common criminal goal. At its heart, the statute requires prosecutors to prove the existence of an “enterprise” and a “pattern of racketeering activity.”
The charges reach far beyond Trump. Among the 18 Trump allies charged in the case are Rudolph Giuliani, the former New York City mayor and lawyer for Trump, and Mark Meadows, the former White House chief of staff. Also charged are several more lawyers who are accused of working to try to overturn the election, including John Eastman and Sidney Powell.
The charges fall into several baskets. Several of the individual counts stem from false claims of election fraud that Giuliani and two other Trump lawyers made at legislative hearings in December 2020. Another batch of charges concerns a plan to vote for a false slate of pro-Trump electors. A third raft of charges accuses several Trump allies of conspiring to steal voter data and tamper with voting equipment in Coffee County, Ga. ----
A federal judge is mulling requests from five defendants to move their cases to federal court. Mr. Chesebro demanded a speedy trial in state court.
Ms. Powell made a similar demand soon after, but neither defendant wanted to be tried with the other. Both asked the judge to sever their cases from each other’s.
Lawyers for Mr. Chesebro and Ms. Powell noted that even though their clients were charged with participating in a conspiracy to overturn Mr. Trump’s election loss in Georgia, the two were charged with very different roles in it.
Prosecutors say that Mr. Chesebro, a lawyer, took part in a sweeping plot to create slates of fake electors pledged to Mr. Trump in several key swing states that he had lost. The charges against Ms. Powell, also a lawyer, stem from her involvement in a data breach by Trump supporters in an elections office in rural Coffee County, Ga.
In court filings, Mr. Chesebro’s lawyers argued that the allegations against Mr. Chesebro and Ms. Powell were “akin to oil and water; wholly separate and impossible to mix (into one conspiracy).” One of the lawyers, Scott Grubman, raised the possibility that the same jury hearing his client’s case would be subjected to weeks, if not months, of testimony about the data breach that he was not involved in.
Attorney Brian T. Rafferty, who is defending Sidney Powell, argues before Judge McAfee on Wednesday,Credit...Pool photo by Jason Getz
Brian T. Rafferty, a lawyer for Ms. Powell, sounded a similar theme, arguing that Ms. Powell’s defense was “going to get washed away” by lengthy discussions about the fake electors scheme.
But Will Wooten, a deputy district attorney, argued that Mr. Chesebro and Ms. Powell were part of the same overarching racketeering conspiracy. “The conspiracy evolved: One thing didn’t work, so we move on to the next thing,” he said. “That thing didn’t work, so we move on to the next thing.”
Judge McAfee, in the end, decided that Mr. Chesebro and Ms. Powell would get a fair trial if tried together. He also noted that it would save time and money to combine them.
---- A Guide to the Various Trump Investigations Confused about the inquiries and legal cases involving former President Donald Trump? We’re here to help.
Key Cases and Inquiries: The former president faces several investigations at both the state and the federal levels, into matters related to his business and political careers. Here is a close look at each. Case Tracker: Trump is at the center of four criminal investigations. Keep track of the developments in each here. What if Trump Is Convicted?: Will any of the proceedings hinder Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign? Can a convicted felon even run for office? Here is what we know, and what we don’t know. ---
Still, when or where all 19 defendants will ultimately face trial remains uncertain.The efforts to move the case to federal court have been led by Mark Meadows, a defendant who served as White House chief of staff under Mr. Trump. Such a move would expand the jury pool into suburban counties that are somewhat more supportive of Mr. Trump, and it would increase the likelihood of the United States Supreme Court, a third of whose members were appointed by Mr. Trump, getting involved in potential appeals.
Defendants would still be tried under state laws, however, and the case would not be subject to a president’s power to pardon federal crimes.
While typically only federal officials can get their cases moved to federal court, it is possible that if even one defendant succeeds at it, the others will come with him or her.
Some defendants who were not federal employees at the time the alleged crimes took place are claiming that their role as bogus Trump electors qualifies them for a move to federal court. A lawyer for Shawn Still, a Georgia state senator, argued last month in a legal filing that Mr. Still was acting “in his capacity as a contingent United States presidential elector” and thus “was, or was acting under, an officer of the United States.”
Ms. Willis’s office scoffed at that assertion, arguing in a motion filed Tuesday that Mr. Still “and his fellow fraudulent electors conspired in a scheme to impersonate true Georgia presidential electors; their fiction is not entitled to recognition by this Court.”
Mr. Trump, like the other defendants, has pleaded not guilty, waiving an arraignment that was supposed to have taken place on Wednesday. He continues to use the Georgia investigation as an opportunity to raise money.
“Today was supposed to be my scheduled arraignment in Atlanta,” he wrote to potential donors on Wednesday, adding that, “Instead, I want to make today a massive grassroots fundraising day.”
Richard Fausset is a correspondent based in Atlanta. He mainly writes about the American South, focusing on politics, culture, race, poverty and criminal justice. He previously worked at The Los Angeles Times, including as a foreign correspondent in Mexico City. More about Richard Fausset
Danny Hakim is an investigative reporter. He has been a European economics correspondent and bureau chief in Albany and Detroit. He was also a lead reporter on the team awarded the 2009 Pulitzer Prize for Breaking News. More about Danny Hakim
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
