Emily Kohrs’ grand jury ponders ‘nonconsequential’
A lawyer who previously worked in the Trump White House does not believe recent comments from a member of the Georgia grand jury tasked with preparing a report on the 45-year-old’s efforts.
Emily Kohrs, the forewoman of the special grand jury empowered by a Peach State district judge to investigate efforts by the former president and his allies to undermine the election following Joe Biden’s victory, recently admitted to a series of interviews detailing the issue various media about what happened behind the scenes.
“I kind of wanted to subpoena the former president because I had to swear everyone in,” Kohrs said in an interview. “And so I thought it would be really cool to get 60 seconds with President Trump where I look at him like, ‘Do you solemnly swear…?’ I just – I just thought it would be a great moment.
Since speaking up, her comment has become a lightning rod for criticism, though she doesn’t list charges or discuss votes.
Attorneys for Trump lawsuit The 30-year-old’s attitude is proof that the whole trial is essentially a farce that lacks credibility. Enemies of the 45th President have complained that her comments could jeopardize efforts to prosecute anyone implicated in the longstanding investigations by the Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, Trump or otherwise.
But a lawyer who previously worked for Trump – in his capacity as White House Counsel – said he doubted Kohrs’ comments would change the course of what ultimately happens in the case.
“How much impact do you think this grand juror’s comments will or should have legally?” Dan Abrams, founder of Law&Crime, asked attorney Ty Cobb during a Monday appearance on Abrams’ SiriusXM radio show.
“Hard to say,” Cobb replied. “I believe it was certainly strange and unprecedented and will be fodder for defense motions and objections. But at the end of the day, I don’t see it as that consequential.”
ALSO SEE: Georgia grand jury closes probe into Trump’s effort to overturn 2020 election as judge announces fight to release report
“This is not the grand jury that would return the indictment,” Cobb continued, echoing an earlier point made by Abrams. “These charges will — must be considered — be considered and presented by a separate grand jury. Which provides some isolation for that.”
Earlier this month, the grand jury’s special report recommended “that the district attorney bring appropriate charges for such crimes when the evidence is convincing,” noting that at least one witness may have committed perjury, an unedited passage said.
Cobb said that while Kohrs’ comments would not have any formal impact, their informal presence could very well be felt.
“The legal meaning of that is, you know, strategic,” he said. “In my view, it’s nonconsequential, but it’s strategic, because, you know, a motion that further investigates the relationship between the prosecutor’s office and the grand jury and any grand jury irregularities that come to light is getting more traction now than ordinarily have because of their comments and their discussion of deliberations.”
Some of Kohrs’ critics have said that their comments to the media included one of the topics that Fulton County Superior Court Judge Robert McBurney found Kohrs’ own judgment to prohibit: grand jury deliberations. Others have said that their comments did not quite reach the level of discussing deliberations.
SEE ALSO: ‘Denied’: Supreme Court denies Lindsey Graham’s offer to avoid testifying before the grand jury in the 2020 election subversion investigation
For his part, Cobb said he believed she had made up her mind.
But the former Trump attorney wasn’t convinced her comments would have much traction as Trump’s current legal team eventually works to quash the findings of the Willis investigation.
“You can’t say, ‘We’ve talked a lot about Trump,’ and act like that doesn’t cross the line of where you shouldn’t be talking about deliberations,” he said. “Strategically it gives the Trump team room to maneuver and there will be some follow up and maybe an evidence hearing on that which at the end of the day won’t result in the dismissal of the charges – whatever that may be – but it will certainly serve its purpose by they are trying to undermine the confidence of Georgians and the rest of the country in the fairness of the process.”
Do you have a tip we should know? [email protected]
https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/former-trump-attorney-says-georgia-grand-jury-foreperson-comments-about-investigation-into-election-subversion-not-consequential/ Emily Kohrs’ grand jury ponders ‘nonconsequential’