Discussion with god, why are they only attacking one or in reference to mr. To mr. Wade . And then she goes on. To say, god isnt it them playing the race card when they only question one. Now, if she had been truthful with that congregation, truthful with the community, she wouldve said i had a relationship with him good, bad, forgive me. Whatever thats what she should have said. But she chose to deflect and say the them the reference to them and the others and they saw obviously a reference to that motion filed by him by ms merchants. They choose to go after the black man and she then goes on again deflecting away and deflecting to the what i call the third rail in american society, choosing somebody on the other side of being a racist so and so is a racist. Theyre racist she was the one playing the race card in a way to try to deflect from her own conduct she goes on to say in discussions with the lord, god, is that is it that some some will never see a black man is qualified, no mat
Of the cases that Defense Counsel had cited within their brief that had absolutely no application to the issue that were here before, your honor, today. The first mciver be state has nothing to do. Has nothing related to the disqualification of anyone. I think some of these are just relating to kind of aspiring for broad language about standards to prosecutors. So point taken there but if theyre more all right. Keep it on so as it relates to one of the cases that was referenced here earlier. And as i was also referenced in some of the briefing by Defense Counsel, is the were just savy state, which is to 87 georgia, 542. And ill all of the cases that fall under this, what i would call category is about a attorney who formerly prosecuted a defendant in i guess the same type of case are the same case or similar charges. And that would be why of course, were using the courts found that disqualification would be necessary because of the Relations Kinship that existed between a former client