One of Donald Trump’s co-defendants in the Georgia election interference case just dodged a motion filed by Fulton District Attorney Fani Willis that would have sent him back to jail before the trial begins.
A judge denied Willis’ bond revocation order for Harrison Floyd that she filed on Nov. 15.
Willis cited several of Floyd’s social media posts, which she claims were inflammatory examples that should breach his bond order because of the flagrant ways in which he mentioned co-defendants and witnesses that could be perceived as a “pattern of intimidation.”
She argued that Floyd posed a “significant threat of intimidating witnesses and otherwise obstructing the administration of justice in the future, making him ineligible for bond.”
However, a judge didn’t see it that way.
Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee said during the Nov. 21 bond revocation hearing he didn’t detect any signs of witness intimidation in Floyd’s posts, and although the posts are a “technical violation” of Floyd’s bond, “not every violation compels revocation,” McAfee said.
“I read these as, seeing these more, that someone is wanting to defend his case in a very public way,” McAfee said.
He also noted that Floyd’s current bond deal with Fulton County prosecutors doesn’t address the “nuances” of social media.
As a way to address those nuances, McAfee approved a temporary modified bond order “to specifically prohibit public comment about witnesses” in the future and included more explicit restrictions on Floyd’s posts.
In his posts, Floyd mentioned Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, state election official Gabriel Sterling, former elections worker Ruby Freeman, and Jenna Ellis, a lawyer who accepted a plea deal after being indicted alongside Floyd.
During the hearing that would determine whether Floyd’s bond would be revoked, Willis argued that Floyd’s tweets were a “disgusting” violation of the bond order he agreed to and maintained that they amounted to intimidation.
“He was given the benefit of the doubt … he was given an opportunity to cooperate with the rules of the case, and what he really did was spit on the court and refuse to oblige by three of the seven conditions of his bond order,” Willis said of the bond agreement. “It is unfair to those witnesses. And there are real consequences for allowing defendants to intimidate witnesses.”
In that same hearing, Michael Hill, a witness who confirmed the authenticity of Floyd’s posts on X, testified that the attorney for Jenna Ellis said that Ellis believed the posts she was mentioned in were meant to intimidate her.
Floyd’s attorney, John Morrison, asked Hill if Floyd sent any witness a direct message on X. Hill responded that he couldn’t say that he did, but said that Floyd used the tagging function to refer to and communicate with witnesses.
“Threats and intimidation are well refined in Georgia law; none of these posts amount to a threat or intimidation,” Floyd’s lawyer stated.
Judge McAfee clarified that as part of the revised bond order, Floyd could make criticisms online and publicly proclaim his innocence without mentioning his co-defendants and witnesses in the case.
“Obviously, we’re very concerned about the safety of Miss Ruby Freeman. She has clearly endured enough. And this conduct is not just chilling to her” but “chilling to other people who would want to serve in her capacity,” Willis said following the hearing.
