Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis appeared in court to testify regarding her relationship with Mr. Wade and the financial transactions between them. The courtroom proceedings were marked by moments of tension and objections from both sides.
During the questioning, Ms. Willis denied the claim that Mr. Wade lived with her in South Fulton in 2019 or any other time. She emphasized that not only did he never reside with her, but he had also never visited her residence during those years. She stated that these allegations were false and had been included in three different documents submitted by the opposing party.
The defense counsel attempted to question Ms. Willis about Mr. Wade's visits to her various residences. However, the questioning became confusing and repetitive, leading the judge to caution Ms. Willis and threaten to strike her testimony if she continued to deviate from specific questions.
The defense also inquired about whether Ms. Willis and Mr. Wade had dined together outside of the mentioned vacations. Ms. Willis initially had difficulty recalling any specific instances but acknowledged that they might have gone out for meals together. She stressed that they did not split bills but rather took turns paying.
Regarding financial transactions, Ms. Willis confirmed that she had given Mr. Wade cash on a few occasions. However, she denied ever using the Cash App to provide him with money. The defense questioned whether she had any written proof of these transactions, to which Ms. Willis mentioned some potential records from trips and minor expenses charged to her card.
The defense then shifted their focus to a tax lien that Ms. Willis had before taking office as district attorney. They suggested that the money she gave Mr. Wade could have been used instead to pay off the lien. The defense sought to establish that Ms. Willis did not possess significant amounts of cash as she had previously stated.
The judge intervened, questioning the relevance of the tax lien issue to the proceedings. The defense justified their line of questioning by aiming to demonstrate Ms. Willis's financial situation and refute her claims about having substantial cash on hand.
While tensions flared and objections were raised, the courtroom testimony provided some insight into the nature of the relationship and financial exchanges between Ms. Willis and Mr. Wade. The trial continued as the defense sought to examine the financial aspects further.
It is important to note that this article provides a summary of the transcript and does not reflect any final determinations or conclusions regarding the proceedings or individuals involved. The trial will continue, and the court will ultimately reach its judgment based on the presented evidence and arguments.
