InsiderAdvantage has spoken to various attorneys of all political stripes who agree that the loose-lipped media interviews by Fulton County special grand jury forewoman Emily Kohrs hurts the credibility of the panel investigating possible criminal interference in the 2020 presidential election. And former President Donald Trump’s Atlanta lawyers argue the details she divulged have “poisoned” the inquiry launched by Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis.
The 30-year-old Kohrs– who says she has never voted but leans Democrat and who is fascinated with witchcraft and the occult– was identified through a media public records request. She spilled to reporters that the supposedly fact-finding grand jury, which can only make recommendations on whether prosecutors should indict, had made such recommendations for more than 12 people in the case. (Willis will ultimately make any charging decisions before a regular grand jury.)
Ms. Kohrs declined to name anyone or say which laws she thinks have been broken, but when asked if the former president was among those recommended for indictment, she giggled that “You’re not going to be shocked. It’s not rocket science.”
The lawyers we’ve talked with say Kohrs’s ramblings hurt Willis’ case because the forewoman’s discussion of inside jury talk diminishes the seriousness, reliability and due process of the proceedings. But in an interview with the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, presiding Superior Court Judge Robert McBurney claims he told jurors that deliberations are only “the discussions they had amongst themselves when it was just the grand jurors in the room.” By contrast, if a witness or prosecutor was in the room, “that’s not deliberations,” he said.
Trump lawyer Drew Findling, though, gave another perspective.
“If, let’s say, there is a recommendation to go to a grand jury, all potential grand juries in this part of the country that listen to a radio, read a newspaper, watch TV, go online, look at the news alerts on their phone, are now reading about the deliberations or what could be interpreted as the deliberations of that grand jury.”
Included in the Trump lawyers’ criticisms of the jurors’ investigation is Kohrs’s amazing revelation that jurors discussed media coverage of the case. “They were permitted during the course of seven months to read your newspaper, to read the local newspaper, to watch the news, to go on the internet and apparently even able to bring those sources of material into the four corners of the grand jury room?” Findling said. “What kind of reliable body is that?”
The Trump attorneys further argue that some of the details Ms. Kohrs discussed to the media underscore the “flippant, jovial, almost disrespectful approach” of the broader investigation. Findling, for example, pointed out that in one interview Kohrs thought it “cool” that she swore in a witness while holding a popsicle.
Clark Cunningham, a law professor at Georgia State University, said Kohrs’s various media interviews suggest that Willis would be wise to “make no mention of the special grand jury report or its findings” when she seeks indictments before a regular grand jury. That would, he added, preclude arguments from defense lawyers “that indictments were tainted by the views and opinions of the special grand jury.”
It also appears that Kohrs has now stopped talking to the media. In the meantime, social media has been abuzz with comments. A typical tweet from a Democrat named Earskin Jackson flatly says: “Why don’t you shut the hell up. You’re helping Trump.” Other comments point to Kohrs’ weird Pinterest account with its fascination of witchcraft. And still others wonder if Judge McBurney, or someone else, has told her to quiet down.
