Lawyers representing Donald Trump and his codefendants in a Georgia election interference case extensively questioned a pivotal witness on Tuesday in an attempt to undermine Fani Willis, the Fulton County district attorney prosecuting the former president.

Terrence Bradley, described as a "star witness" by the trial judge, faced rigorous interrogation from the defense team regarding his knowledge of an alleged romantic relationship between special prosecutor Nathan Wade and District Attorney Willis.

'Star witness' can't recall when Georgia DA Fani Willis, Trump special prosecutor began affair https://t.co/NeozqXtW4p

— USA TODAY (@USATODAY) February 28, 2024

The latest

The defense sought to establish that Willis engaged in a conflict of interest by hiring Wade, who was reportedly involved in an affair with her while overseeing the investigation into Trump's alleged efforts to overturn his 2020 electoral defeat in Georgia.

During two hours of intense questioning, Bradley, a former law partner of Wade's, struggled to recall specifics about when he became aware of the relationship between Wade and Willis.

The defense hoped Bradley would confirm under oath that the affair commenced before Willis appointed Wade on November 1, 2021, contradicting sworn testimony from both parties that their relationship began later and thus did not constitute a conflict of interest.

The standoff

The standoff occurred following extensive legal battles over whether Bradley could disclose information about the relationship, as his conversations with Wade, his former client, were protected by attorney-client privilege.

Despite the defense's efforts to elicit damaging testimony, Bradley's responses often remained vague, leading to frustration among the defense attorneys.

Judge Scott McAfee, presiding over Fulton County Superior Court, ordered Bradley to undergo additional testimony after his initial appearance failed to provide substantial evidence.

High expectations

Expectations were high for Bradley's testimony, particularly after the defense introduced texts suggesting he was aware of the alleged affair before the parties claimed it began.

Bradley's testimony failed to meet the defense's expectations. Despite confirming certain details in texts exchanged with defense lawyers, Bradley maintained that he was speculating and could not recall specific conversations or details about the affair.

Defense attorneys repeatedly challenged Bradley's responses, suggesting he was attempting to distance himself from his previous statements.

Bradley denied this accusation but struggled to provide a coherent explanation for his contradictory statements.

The proceedings underscored the complexity of the case and the challenges faced by both sides in establishing their respective arguments. McAfee indicated that final arguments on the matter would be heard on Friday.