Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis is warning all 19 defendants, including Donald Trump, in her case alleging racketeering and numerous other charges of election subversion that invoking Georgia’s “speedy trial” law but demanding to have their cases tried individually instead of en masse will bring consequences and deprive them of valuable advantages.
Willis’ goal is to have one trial for all 19 defendants in October.
Attorneys Sidney Powell and Kenneth Chesebro have already requested to have their cases severed from the group. Chesebro’s trial is now scheduled for October 23, as The Messenger reports.
But The Messenger’s senior legal correspondent Adam Klasfeld adds, “Willis wants to advise all of the defendants in the Trump racketeering case that decisions by Ken Chesebro and Sidney Powell to invoke speedy trial rights come with certain consequences.”
READ MORE: ‘Your Question Is Flawed’: Karine Jean-Pierre Isn’t Humoring Peter Doocy Anymore
Those consequences, based on Georgia law, according to a legal filing Klasfeld posted, include four constraints on the ability to demand discovery materials and call witnesses:
“Defendants cannot now argue that they are entitled to the State’s discovery responses ten (10) days in advance of trial.”
“Defendants cannot now argue that they are entitled to notice of the State’s similar transaction evidence ten (10) days in advance of trial.”
“Defendants are now precluded from calling any witnesses whose statements were not provided to the State at least ten (10) days in advance of trial.”
“Defendants cannot now complain that they received less than seven (7) days notice of the trial date in this case.”
Klasfeld notes, “Willis prompts the defendants to choose their paths in light of these consequences: ‘Should they refuse to waive their speedy trial demand and request a continuance, then any harm to the Defendants would be invited by the Defense and, therefore, not reversible error.'”
Over at The Messenger, Klasfeld writes that Willis’ office has asked the judge “to issue a ruling requiring ‘that the defendants personally place upon the record that this is their decision and preference to proceed in this fashion prior to the trial of the case.’”