You on your own, came up with the whole notion
that it started when she left the DA's office and
was judged in South full.
That's according to you. That's speculation on your part,
correct. Overruled.
Answer the question, Mr. Brown.
Yes, that's that's speculation on my part.
Yes, right. It had nothing to do with what Mr.
Wade had told you. Correct
answer your question. I was speculating to
the answer that is correct.
So maybe you can tell the court in your own
words.
Why in the heck would you speculate
in this text message and say that it started when
she left the
DA's office and was a judge in South Fulton?
Why would you speculate and say that in a text?
All right. Let's continue now.
I'm publishing it after you said the word absolutely
on your own. You said it started when she left
the DA's office and was judge in South Fulton.
They met at asked an
answer.
All right. Understood Mr. Body.
I'm going to let Mr.
State. I'll have a few minutes on this
and we'll go from there.
But Judge, I I well,
I'm sorry, I did answer this.
I answered it for Miss
Merchant. I stated that I was speculating the judge someone
objected to the speculation and but this was the exact
same language when I said that Mister Bradley,
Mr. Sato was asking the question in a slightly different
manner and I'm going to give him a little bit
of leeway to do that.
So Mr. Sato, all
right. I hesitate to have to start back
where I was, but after the word absolutely
you on your own said it started when she left
the DA's office and was judged in South Fulton.
They met at the Municipal Court
Cle conference. That's what you said,
correct? That is correct. Now,
it's your testimony, at least so far,
that when you on your own
gave those two statements in the text
that you were merely speculating and did not have that
knowledge from Mr.
Wade. Is that your testimony underoath?
Yes, that's what I testified to.
Yes, Sir. So you on your own,
came up with the whole notion that it started when
she left the DA's office and was judged in South
Fulton.
That's according to you. That's speculation on your part.
Correct. Overall,
answer the question, Mr. Bradley.
Yes, that's. That's speculation on my part.
Yes. Right. It had nothing to do with what Mr.
Wade had told you, Correct.
I answered your question. I was speculating to
the answer that is correct.
So maybe you can tell the court in your own
words,
why in the heck would you speculate
in this text message and say that it started when
she left the
DA's office and was a judge in South Fulton?
Why would you speculate and say that in a text?
I knew they had met
at the Municipal Court
conference. How do you know that?
I'll stop you right there.
How did you know that?
I answered that The last.
At the last.
I knew that. I knew that because when you
I'm asking you questions and you
are in a situation where you get to give answers.
I'm asking you, how did you know that?
How did I know when they met?
Somebody told you that, right?
When they met. Yeah. Yes,
correct. Who told you?
Mr. Wade told me when they met.
So you had more than one conversation about the relationship
between Mr.
Wade and Miss Willis because he told you where he
met her.
That's correct. Incorrect.
It's incorrect. It's incorrect.
Let's go back to let's go back to the exhibit.
Why would you speculate that that's when they started the
relationship?
What would cause you to put that down as speculation?
I don't recall. But
why? I thought that it started at that time,
but I do recall that he only met her and
I testified to that,
that he met her in at that conference,
which was in 2019.
You knew that Ashley Merchant represented a defendant in this
case when you were text messaging with her,
correct?
Yes, I did, Yes. And you knew that the reason
she was asking you questions about Mr.
Wade was because she was trying to show when the
relationship began,
correct?
No, that's not.
That's not correct. Getting the text message,
yes. But what? What messages were before this message?
Before she said that I I can't answer that question
because I don't have them.
All I have is what's in front of you.
Yes. And it's that she says.
Do you think it started before she hired me?
So you knew as the counsel for a defendant in
this case that Miss Merchant was asking you specifically about
the knowledge that you had regarding the timing of the
relationship between Wade and Miss Willis,
correct?
I mean, based on this,
yes, I see. What was that?
And in response to that,
you answered directly on your own
what you now claim to be speculation,
right? That's correct. So I ask you one more time
before I move to the next part of this.
Why would you speculate when she was asking you a
direct question about when the relationship started?
I have no answer for that,
except for the fact that you do in fact know
when it started and you don't want to testify to
that in court.
That's the best explanation, didn't it?
This is overruled, tentative.
That's the real that's the true explanation.
Because you don't want to admit it in court,
correct?
No. I have no direct knowledge of when the relationship
started
you. I'm not going to go back through that again.
But if you didn't know
and you were as specifically as this exhibit shows,
I mean, you can explain why you wouldn't say.
I don't know.
Is that a question you're asking me a question to
ask.
Definite, definite question. State that again,
I apologize
if you're being asked as we've just gone through with
this text message
from Miss Merchant. Yes. As the attorney for a Co
defendant,
yes. And she's asking you about the relationship and she's
clearly asking you about the timing.
Why wouldn't you just have said in response,
I don't know when it started,
I don't know why I didn't say.
I don't know.
Maybe again, it's because you know what the truth is
and that's why you answered exactly the way you did
in defense Exhibit 26.
Correct.
No, I can't sit here and tell you that what
you just stated was correct.
What you want the court to believe and you want
the rest of us to believe is that for some
unknown reason,
upon being asked a direct question about when the relationship
started,
you decided on your own
to simply speculate and put it down in a text
message
as opposed to putting down what you actually knew.
That's what you want the court to believe,
correct?
That was a lot. So can you break that down?
I apologize. You're asking me do I want the court
to
to to
believe that instead of saying nothing,
you decided on your own to speculate?
Yes. I speculated yes. I've.
I've stated that. I've speculated.
Yes, Sir. That's what you want the court to believe,
correct? That's correct. OK. Now
then when you go to the next
page of that
OK you see it starts the best that I can
see it starts
in South Fulton is that what you have in front
of you
second page
the second page that I have says that's what I
figured
OK I that may be cut off from the one
that I have
it's I'm looking at
my opening set line says in South Fulton is that
on your second page?
No. So the if you're going in order of the
pages. No. Neither page starts with S Fulton
Now am I don't get caught up in whether it
starts that way.
Does the second page have a line in there that
says in South Fulton.
Oh yes. I apologize. So,
yes, that's fine. Yes. Just want to make sure that
we're on the same page.
Yes.
You say after in South Fulton,
they met at the Municipal Court Cle conference,
right?
Yes. You see that? Yes,
that's correct. And then Miss Merchant says
that's what I figured when he was married.
Is this accurate? Upon information and belief,
Willis and Wade met
while both were serving as magistrate judges and began a
romantic relationship at that time.
You see, that's what she said,
right? No, I mean, so it says they met at
Municipal Court Cle.
The only other thing here says that's what I figured
when he was married.
There's no response for me on that day.
And then there's another response.
I mean, I guess a question that says is this
accurate?
OK, that's what I was just,
that's what I just went over with you.
OK. So I don't have
anything in that. Is this accurate at all?
I can show the court.
It's just
it just says is this accurate with the question mark.
I don't have anything following that
you don't have after that,
Upon information and belief, Willis and Wade met while both
were serving as magistrate judges and began a romantic relationship.
With that, I apologize. It goes to the next page.
I apologize. No problem. Just want to make sure.
No, no, I I see that now.
Yes. All right. So that's what I just read
is exactly what Miss Merchant said to you
in the text, right.
Yes, that was in the test Is,
is it accurate upon further information,
Yes, that's there. And again,
since you have told us that you were speculating when
you gave the answer that we went over with previously
on this one, you don't say,
I don't know. You simply correct her by saying no
Municipal Court,
right?
Yes. So that she asked was it accurate?
And I said it wasn't accurate.
No, it wasn't accurate. It was Municipal Court,
right. And when you said it wasn't accurate,
it was Municipal Court, you weren't.
Didn't say no, that's not accurate.
They didn't start a romantic relationship at that time,
correct. No. But I was referring to the
Municipal Court. No, it wasn't accurate
as it applied to the.
I was answering the no Municipal Court meaning
when she said is that accurate,
it was to the Municipal Court and not Magistrate Court.
But you didn't say that the rest of what she
asked you was accurate.
You didn't say no, that's inaccurate.
That's not true. That's not accurate.
You simply said the only thing that wasn't accurate was
Municipal Court should be there instead of magistrate,
right.
So I was answering the question of
it was a compound question
and I was I was answering the question of
she wrote Magistrate Court and I said no Municipal Court,
right. But it's not compound.
It's one statement upon information that believe I'm sorry.
I know that's OK. It's.
I know the feedback and the delay is is complicates
things,
but I think you've adequately made your point here and
I don't think we need to belabor it much longer.
And let's move on to the next issue.
OK.
Thank you.
Mr. Bradley. Prior to coming into court today,
you and your lawyer meet with anyone from the district
attorney's office.
No,
I mean, no, not that I know I'm aware of,
though I did not meet to anyone.
Sorry. I did not meet with anyone
outside of my attorneys. Did you have any conversation?
I did not conversation. I did not.
So you have not spoken,
if I understand you correctly,
prior to coming into court today,
you've not spoken with the prosecutors?
No.
Right. I've not spoken to the prosecutors.
I've not spoken to defense.
Have you spoken to Mr.
Wade? No.
So
as far as just getting into the courtroom today,
there's been no contact or conversation in it with any
of the parties we just went over,
right? There has not been any contact with defense or
the state at all.
I think I have basically just one or two more
questions.
Why would you see the need to speculate when you
were texting with Miss Marchant I I I think we
did cover that one Mr.
Sadow
that that I think that exact question was already put
to him.
What
would be the what would be the next one
We I'm. I'm trying to look let's go to 27
depends exhibit 27. Do you have that now,
Sir? I do, Sir. All right.
Would you look at it and tell me whether or
not the
Defense Exhibit 27 appears to be
accurate? Because I want to seek to introduce it into
evidence.
It consists of an e-mail to you from Miss Merchant
and the text response from you.
Correct.
But the text response was not
in response.
So yes, it does consist of
the e-mail and a text response.
I'm not saying that the text response applies to the
entire e-mail that was sent.
All
I've asked you right now is
are the yes is the e-mail and the text.
Are those accurate in the interaction that makes up the
fence Exhibit 27
as it applies to the stapling of the e-mail and
the stapling of a text message chain.
Yes. That is defense defendants Exhibit 27.
This is
it's accurate.
OK. I would move defense Exhibit 27 in.
I believe it was treated the same way as 26
last time.
Same objections, Mr. Abadi.
Yes, judge. All right. Overruled.
Any other objections from defense counsel seeing none.
Defense Exhibit 27 is admitted.
Anything else? I don't know.
Yeah, I don't know whether you'll find this objectionable or
not.
Asking. Obviously,
Mr. Bradley, you realize that if you were to testify
underoath
that you knew from Mr.
Wade that the relationship between him and Miss Willis existed
for the contract in November 1st of
2021, That if you testified that you knew that for
Mr.
Wade, that would show that both Miss
Willis and Mr. Wade had lied underoath.
You know that, don't you?
I think that's going to call for an opinion on
the
credibility of another testifying witness.
So I don't think that would be a appropriate question.