ads
Edition: United States
language: English
ads
ads
Court Hearing: Witness Testifies On Motion To Dismiss Indictment

Court Hearing: Witness Testifies On Motion To Dismiss Indictment

Politics Desk 27 Feb , 2024 09:01 PM GMT

  • Mr. Bradley questioned about Ms. Merchant's motion to dismiss grand jury indictment.

  • Initially claimed unawareness but later acknowledged understanding from motion title.

  • Court prevented detailed examination, stressing relevance in questioning.

Court Hearing: Witness Testifies On Motion To Dismiss Indictment
Terrence Bradley, Special prosecutor Nathan Wade’s former law partner and onetime divorce attorney, testifies in court Tuesday, Feb. 27, 2024, in Atlanta. Bradley testified as a judge considered an ef
AP
ads

During a recent court session, Mr. Bradley was questioned about his knowledge of a motion sent by Ms. Merchant. The motion in question aimed to dismiss a grand jury indictment and disqualify the district attorney and special prosecutor from further involvement in the case. Mr. Bradley initially stated that he was unaware of Ms. Merchant's intentions when reviewing the motion. However, upon further questioning, it was revealed that the title of the motion clearly outlined its purpose, indicating that Mr. Bradley did have an understanding of its contents.

Despite objections raised during the questioning, it was established that Mr. Bradley had indeed reviewed the motion and was familiar with its key points. The court intervened to prevent a detailed line-by-line examination of the motion, emphasizing the need to focus on relevant aspects. The proceedings also saw a request for a brief recess after two hours of questioning, which was granted by the judge.

ads

Initially claimed unawareness but later acknowledged understanding from motion title.

Mr. Bradley questioned about Ms. Merchant's motion to dismiss grand jury indictment.

Court prevented detailed examination, stressing relevance in questioning.

Following Mr. Bradley's testimony, Mr. Kucherov was scheduled to provide further questioning. However, a five-minute break was requested before proceeding, and the court noted the absence of Ms. Latham, whose representative had waived her presence. The session concluded with plans to resume at a specified time for additional questioning.

ads

The court session highlighted the meticulous examination of legal documents and the need for clarity in communication between parties involved in the case. Despite some procedural delays and interruptions, the proceedings maintained a focus on addressing key issues and ensuring a fair and thorough examination of the matter at hand.

End of Article

No COMMENT ON THIS STORY
ads
ads

Next Story