Judge Stays Young Thug’s Georgia Trial Over Misconduct Complaints


ATLANTA — The judge overseeing the criminal racketeering case against Young Thug has suspended the trial indefinitely until an outside judge can consider motions by the Atlanta rapper and others seeking to remove the judge from the case amid allegations that he and prosecutors held an improper meeting with a key witness.

Fulton County Superior Court Judge Ural Glanville made the surprise announcement as attorneys gathered for what was supposed to be a private hearing to review the transcript of a June 10 meeting between the judge, prosecutors and Kenneth Copeland, a Young Thug associate and star witness in the gang conspiracy case.

Several defense attorneys sought to remove Glanville from overseeing the case, calling his meeting with a sworn witness “inappropriate” and accusing the judge and prosecutors of pressuring a key witness to testify — requests Glanville had rejected.

Last month, Brian Steel, Young Thug’s lead attorney, was found guilty of criminal contempt and sentenced to serve 20 weekend days in jail after questioning Glanville about the meeting and refusing to reveal who told him about it — a sentence the Georgia Supreme Court later suspended while Steel appeals.

On Monday, Glanville made the hearing public and announced from the courtroom that he planned to release the full transcript of the meeting with Copeland “so that everyone has an opportunity to review it.” He later backtracked, announcing that he would refer the motions for recusal to another judge to determine whether he should remain on the case.

“We will be on hiatus until then,” Glanville said.

The announcement caught many by surprise, including prosecutors who immediately expressed concerns about the impact on the jury of what is already the longest criminal trial in Georgia history, which has lasted 18 months and continues to drag on. Jurors have not heard testimony in the case since June 17 because of disputes over Copeland’s testimony and evidentiary issues.

“Do we have a timetable for when the motion to disqualify might be heard?” asked Simone Hylton, a Fulton County assistant district attorney and lead prosecutor in the case.

“I don’t know,” Glanville replied. “I have nothing to do with it.”

The dramatic developments come as the racketeering trial against Young Thug, whose real name is Jeffery Lamar Williams, drags on at a glacial pace, marred by jury and witness issues and other day-to-day turmoil that has engulfed the high-profile trial led by Fulton County District Attorney Fani T. Willis (D).

The Young Thug case is one of two high-profile criminal racketeering cases being prosecuted by Willis’ office. Last summer, the veteran prosecutor brought charges against former President Donald Trump and more than a dozen of his associates, alleging they criminally conspired to try to overturn Trump’s 2020 election loss in Georgia.

That case has now stalled, with Trump and others appealing a judge’s decision allowing Willis to proceed following complaints that she had an inappropriate romantic relationship with the former lead prosecutor in the case.

Young Thug and 27 other associates were indicted in May 2022 in a sweeping grand jury indictment that alleged the rapper and his associates were members of a violent criminal street gang in Atlanta.

Prosecutors alleged that Young Thug was the leader of the gang, known as YSL, or Young Slime Life, and charged him with criminal racketeering and gang charges while others were charged with other violent crimes, including murder and attempted armed robbery.

Young Thug’s lawyers countered by claiming that YSL was simply a record label and attacked prosecutors for introducing Young Thug’s lyrics as evidence at trial, arguing that his rhymes were merely artistic expression and not a literal account of criminal acts.

Jury selection in the case began in January 2023 and lasted 10 months. Opening statements were held in late November, but proceedings were almost immediately halted after one of Young Thug’s co-defendants was stabbed in jail and hospitalized. Proceedings resumed in January, but have been marred by constant delays, including frequent bickering between lawyers and the judge.

Monday marked the 100th day of proceedings since opening statements, though jurors have heard testimony for only about half of those days. Prosecutors have yet to get through half of their planned witness list, which numbers more than 200 people.

Lawyers in the case have suggested the trial could last until 2025 or beyond – although that was before the latest unrest, which has raised questions about the future of the proceedings and whether Glanville will retain control of the case.

Defense attorneys have repeatedly accused Glanville of bias, accusations that have only intensified in recent weeks. In a June 17 motion, Steel accused Glanville of being an unofficial member of the prosecution team seeking to convict his client.

At the same time, a lawyer for another co-defendant filed an emergency motion with the Georgia Supreme Court to stop the case and consider whether Glanville should recuse himself — a request the high court declined to consider on procedural grounds because it was not heard first by a lower court.

“Glanville’s actions undermine public confidence in the independence, integrity and impartiality of the judicial system,” Doug Weinstein, attorney for rapper Yak Gotti, whose real name is Deamonte Kendrick, wrote in the motion. “There is an appearance of impropriety and bias hanging over the current trial due to Glanville’s failure to follow the law.”

Although it declined to hear the petition, the Georgia Supreme Court notably stated in its decision that if Weinstein filed his petition in Fulton County Superior Court, Glanville “would be disqualified from presiding over the case” and “another judge would review the matter.”

Weinstein refiled his motion Friday night in Fulton County, which was assigned to a different judge.

It’s unclear whether that’s what motivated Monday’s events. From the bench, Glanville read what he said was a written order, outlining a timeline of events leading up to the private meeting with Copeland. He cited extensive case law in arguing he did nothing wrong.

“In this particular case, the court is of the view, based on the case law, that this was an appropriate ex parte meeting,” Glanville said.



Source link

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top