0
0.0
Mar 1, 2024
03/24
by
FOXNEWSW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
and it sounds convoluted but what i would say to the court is she told mr. partridge because mr. partridge told the court that she had absolutely no information about romantic relationship and absolutely no information in regards to -- >> judge mcafee: are you making an argument that these would be attorney-client privileges or communications than? she is communicating with mr. partridge, that is why she has hired him and i should invert things based on the, vacations to him? >> adam: absolutely because they are not attorney-client medications when he discloses them to the court and everyone else as they watch the zoom and attend the hearing, the difference is is there was no request to go on camera. there is no request to go or to have a private conversation with you as was done with mr. bradley. that would have been the proper procedure. so yes, i'm asking you to infer that, 100%. her testimony was at best inconsistent. because the testimony of miss yeartie when she testified was that their little description when asked in a very leading manner, is is it true or do you know tha
and it sounds convoluted but what i would say to the court is she told mr. partridge because mr. partridge told the court that she had absolutely no information about romantic relationship and absolutely no information in regards to -- >> judge mcafee: are you making an argument that these would be attorney-client privileges or communications than? she is communicating with mr. partridge, that is why she has hired him and i should invert things based on the, vacations to him? >>...
0
0.0
Mar 1, 2024
03/24
by
CNNW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
but what i would say that the court is ms yeartie told mr. partridge because mr. parks was told the court that she had absolutely no information about romantic relationship and she had absolutely no information as in regards to wait, are you making an argument? i should make inferences base now these would be attorney-client privileges. are there communications then she's communicating with mr. partridge about what her upcoming testimony is. that's why she's hired him. and you're telling me i should infer things based on her communications to him >> absolutely. because they're not attorney-client communications anymore when he discloses them to the court and everybody else as they watch the zoom and attend the hearing, the difference is is there was no request to go in camera. there was no request to go a tab, a private conversation with you as was done with mr. bradley that would have been the proper procedure. so yes, i'm asking you to infer that 100%. i'm asking you to infer that her testimony was at best inconsistent because the testimony of ms yeartie, when s
but what i would say that the court is ms yeartie told mr. partridge because mr. parks was told the court that she had absolutely no information about romantic relationship and she had absolutely no information as in regards to wait, are you making an argument? i should make inferences base now these would be attorney-client privileges. are there communications then she's communicating with mr. partridge about what her upcoming testimony is. that's why she's hired him. and you're telling me i...
0
0.0
Mar 1, 2024
03/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
what i would say to the court is mr. yeartie told mr. partridge because mr. partridge told the court she had no information about a romantic relationship and no information in regards to -- >> are you making an argument that i should make inferences made -- she's hired him and you're telling me i should infer things based on her communications to him. >> they're the no attorney/client communications when he discloses them to the court and everybody else as they watch the zoom and attend the hearing. the difference is there was no request to go in camera. there was no request to have a private conversation with you as was done with mr. bradley. that would have been the proper procedure. yes, i'm asking you to infer that 100%. i'm asking you to infer her testimony was at best inconsistent because the testimony of ms. yeartie when she testified was vague, very little description when asked in a leading manner, is it true or do you know that ms. willis and mr. wade were in a relationship from 2019 into the time that you were -- excuse me, you were forced to resig
what i would say to the court is mr. yeartie told mr. partridge because mr. partridge told the court she had no information about a romantic relationship and no information in regards to -- >> are you making an argument that i should make inferences made -- she's hired him and you're telling me i should infer things based on her communications to him. >> they're the no attorney/client communications when he discloses them to the court and everybody else as they watch the zoom and...
0
0.0
Mar 2, 2024
03/24
by
CSPAN
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
she's communicating with mr. partridge about what her upcoming testimony is.hat's why she hired him. should i infer things based on her communications to him? >> absolutely. they are notx■f attorney-client communications anymore when he discloses them to the court and everybody else as they watch the zoom and attend the hearing. the differences, there was no request to go on camera. there was no request to attack a private conversation with you as was done with mr. bradley. that would have been the proper procedure. yes, i'm asking you to infer that. to infer that r testimony was at best inconsistent. the testimony of missy already when she testified was vague. very little description. when asked in a very leading manner, is it true or do you know that miss willis and mr. wade were in a relationship from 2019 into the time you were fired -- forced to resign from the district attorney's office in march of 22. she said yes. ■z -- it's absurd. it's absolutely absurd. when she was asked why she believed they were in a romantic relationship based on her observation
she's communicating with mr. partridge about what her upcoming testimony is.hat's why she hired him. should i infer things based on her communications to him? >> absolutely. they are notx■f attorney-client communications anymore when he discloses them to the court and everybody else as they watch the zoom and attend the hearing. the differences, there was no request to go on camera. there was no request to attack a private conversation with you as was done with mr. bradley. that would...