A new twist developed last week in the Georgia 2020 election-related case against former President Donald Trump.

According to the New York Post, Jonathan Miller, the attorney representing former Coffee County election supervisor Misty Hampton, admitted to the court that he was the one who leaked proffer statements from several co-defendants to the media.

The bombshell revelation came during an emergency hearing regarding the prosecutor's request for a protective order aimed at limiting the sharing of evidence in the case.

The leaked videos included statements made by co-defendants "Kenneth Chesebro, Jenna Ellis and Sidney Powell as well as bail bondsman Scott Hall."

What happened?

Miller insisted to the court that he leaked the videos to several undisclosed media outlets so that he could "sleep at night."

"In being transparent with the court and to make sure that nobody else gets blamed for what happened — and so that I can go to sleep well tonight — judge, I did release those videos to one outlet," Miller told Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee.

He added, "And in all candor, I need the court to know that."

Jonathan Miller, counsel for Misty Hampton, admits he was the one who sent the proffer videos to a media outlet (the Ellis and Powell videos).

Hampton is the Coffee Co Election Supervisor who is being persecuted in this case and fighting alongside President Trump.

These videos… pic.twitter.com/jS32KXB3rf

— CannCon (@CannConActual) November 15, 2023

The Post noted:

One leaked video showed Ellis claiming that she was told by a top Trump aide that the then-president “is not going to leave [office] under any circumstances” after his defeat by Joe Biden in the 2020 election.

Another leak showed Powell telling prosecutors she “still believes ‘machine fraud’ tainted the 2020 presidential election.”

The video statements were reportedly required as part of the plea agreements made by the co-defendants in the case.

Social media reacts

There were mixed reactions to the news of the witness statement leaks across social media. Many pointed out that the videos were not protected.

"They weren’t protected by any order. There is nothing illegal about it. I’m not sure why they’d release it though," one X user wrote.

Another X user wrote, "She should fire snd sue her attorney for doing this. He was wooed by a reporter to give them this info. Completely insane and ridiculous!"

The judge ultimately suggested that he's in favor of the prosecutor's request for a protective order, saying, "Until we decide what’s going to be relevant and admissible, this case should be tried and not in the court of public opinion."