Crime Fix with Angenette Levy - Young Thug Judge Could Be Kicked Off Trial by Another Judge

Episode Date: July 5, 2024

Earlier this week, Judge Ural Glanville stunned observers of the Young Thug RICO trial when he announced he was pausing the trial so another judge could determine whether he should recuse himself. The move came after the attorney for the rapper, Brian Steel, called for Glanville to recuse himself along with other lawyers involved in the case following an ex parte meeting with the prosecution’s star witness, Kenneth “Lil Woody” Copeland. Law&Crime’s Angenette Levy goes through the transcript of that meeting and discusses it with Copeland’s former lawyer, Kayla Bumpus, and Atlanta attorney Darryl Cohen in this episode of Crime Fix — a daily show covering the biggest stories in crime.PLEASE SUPPORT THE SHOW: If you’ve ever been injured in an accident, you can check out Morgan & Morgan. You can submit a claim in 8 clicks or less without having to leave your couch. To start your claim, visit: https://www.forthepeople.com/YouTubeTakeoverHost:Angenette Levy  https://twitter.com/Angenette5Guests: Kayla Bumpus https://www.youtube.com/@attorneykaybDarryl Cohen  https://x.com/DarrylBCohenCRIME FIX PRODUCTION:Head of Social Media, YouTube - Bobby SzokeSocial Media Management - Vanessa BeinVideo Editing - Daniel CamachoGuest Booking - Alyssa Fisher & Diane KayeSTAY UP-TO-DATE WITH THE LAW&CRIME NETWORK:Watch Law&Crime Network on YouTubeTV: https://bit.ly/3td2e3yWhere To Watch Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3akxLK5Sign Up For Law&Crime's Daily Newsletter: https://bit.ly/LawandCrimeNewsletterRead Fascinating Articles From Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3td2IqoLAW&CRIME NETWORK SOCIAL MEDIA:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandcrime/Twitter: https://twitter.com/LawCrimeNetworkFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/lawandcrimeTwitch: https://www.twitch.tv/lawandcrimenetworkTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@LawandCrimeSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Wondery Plus subscribers can binge all episodes of this law and crimes series ad free right now. Join Wondery Plus in the Wondery app, Apple podcasts or Spotify. Upon further review, this court will in fact enter an order sending Mr. Adams and Steele's, Mr. Weinstein and Mr. Banks motion to recuse to another judge. The Young Thug Rico trial has been paused indefinitely as Judge Glanville awaits a decision from another judge on whether he should be removed from the case. Until such time as that, those two things are decided and we'll be in recess until that time. One lawyer who came under fire by Glanville is here with her take on this sudden change. I'm Antoinette Levy, and this is Crime Fix. This entire controversy started back on June 10th.

That's when the attorney for rapper Young Thug, whose legal name is Jeffrey Williams, raised a concern that an ex parte meeting had been held without his knowledge regarding the testimony of the prosecution's star witness, Kenneth Lil Woody Copeland. I was told based upon information and belief that when we arrived at 8.30, 9 o'clock today, we did not come into your courtroom until almost 11, 11.30. And what I found out just recently, this is not waived, is that supposedly in chambers, the honorable court reporter at times, honorable court at times, district attorney or district attorneys from the DA's office, as well as investigators, sheriff deputies, Mr. Copeland

and his counsel met together. None of the defense team, to my knowledge, was aware that this was going on. It was told, based upon information and belief, that it was told to the district attorneys that Mr. Copeland intended to plead the Fifth Amendment. Judge Glanville was furious that Steele found out about this meeting and held him in contempt after he refused to reveal his source. How did you get that information supposedly from my chambers? Did somebody tell you? I'm not. You should have told me. You got five minutes. The prosecution says nothing improper happened at this meeting and a transcript was taken. We certainly have the right to request

ex parte communications. That's why we asked that the court reporter be present. This is a matter that the defendants did not have a right to be a part of as this was a matter regarding a civil contempt that the court imposed upon a person for not obeying the court's directive. And the reason this meeting happened in the first place was because Woody invoked his Fifth Amendment privilege. How old are you? Grown. Okay, what does grown mean? I'm an adult. Okay, and when you say you're an adult, what number in years are you? I plead the fifth. Now we have that transcript.

The ex parte meeting in Judge Glanville's chambers took place earlier in the morning on June 10th, and it began with prosecutor Adrian Love bringing up a Georgia statute that outlines witnesses being given immunity and what that means for them. It's called 24-5-507, and I'll get to more on what it says in just a moment. Adrian Love then brought up that she was concerned that Kenneth Copeland's attorney, Jonathan Melnick, may not be explaining everything to him regarding his testimony and his obligation to testify as outlined in that statute that I mentioned earlier. Love said Mr. Melnick relayed to Ms. Hilton last Friday that he had never heard of Statute 24-5-507. Love said the Friday before she received an email that had been sent by Melnick to Brian

Steele and Max Schart in which he said, quote, this is the communication I received from Ms. Love regarding Mr. Copeland. She didn't know if she had been included on this email by mistake. Love said she responded, quote, whose interest are you protecting? Yours or Mr. Steele's? Whose clients? Which clients are you protecting? Whose client? Yours or Mr. Steele's or Mr. Shart's? Love said Melnick wrote back, you are going to get him killed. He means Lil Woody. You made him. You are making him. You made him a target. F you. Love said that it appeared to her that Melnick wasn't really concerned that little Woody might incriminate himself or that he was not being properly protected by immunity. Love then said, quote, Mr. Melnick, if the interest he is protecting is Mr. Copeland's

freedom, he did not convey it by asking us what exposure does he face in testifying. In fact, if he's concerned that testifying will get Mr. Copeland killed and he is not communicating with us, he's communicating with counsel for the defendants, it would seem that he knows a thing or something we don't know. Wow. So it seems like Adrian Love is saying that Little Woody is supposed to be a state's witness with immunity testifying for the prosecution. So that would make him adverse to Young Tho, Jeffrey Williams, and Shannon Stilwell. Maxwell Shart is Stilwell's lawyer. But Love makes it sound as if Melnick is working with Shart and Steele instead of representing the interests of his client, Little Woody.

Now, Little Woody was granted immunity. So back to that statute I mentioned earlier, it's 24-5-507. It outlines a witness being given immunity. It states, no testimony or other evidence required under the order or any information directly or indirectly derived from such testimony or evidence shall be used against the person in any proceeding or prosecution for a crime or offense concerning which he or she testified or produced evidence under court order. The statute does say, however, that a person could be prosecuted for perjury if they lie or they could be held in contempt if they fail to testify. And remember when it was stated that Lil Woody could be held indefinitely if he didn't testify?

The statute says, if a person refuses to testify after being granted immunity from prosecution and after being ordered to testify as set forth in this code section, such person may be adjudged in contempt and committed to the county jail until such time as such person purges himself or herself of the contempt by testifying as ordered. So it's right there in the Georgia statute. Adrian Love also claimed that Jonathan Melnick, Little Woody's attorney, stated that he would not be representing Woody anymore if he testified. Judge Glanville, after receiving questions from Little Woody's standing counsel, Kayla Bumpus, about the statute and how long Woody could be held, said, quote, you know, the whole thing is that he can, he has the keys to his own freedom, and the freedom is if he just gives his testimony, then he's purged it. Kayla Bumpus then responded, right.

Adrian Love then said, and you know, whatever that testimony is, we know what we believe it to be, but you know, we don't know what it is. We can't talk about it. We don't, you know, we don't know what he's going to say. We have an idea. We know what he told us. Then little Woody was brought into this meeting. Little Woody said at one point, I want to speak to you personally that I have never been truthful a day in my life until I just made this statement right now. He also said, I don't comprehend none of this stuff that's going on. I got family members watching this trial and I don't want my nephew and them to hear the things that I may be involved in and think it's okay. He later said, I don't trust, I don't know what's going on. I don't trust nobody. The conversation continued between Assistant DA Hilton and Copeland.

Hilton saying, but what did I tell you? When we met with each other, I said to you, you asked me, what is the one thing that's going to get me in jail? Didn't you ask me that? And what was my response? I said, if you plead the fifth, and that is exactly what you did on the stand. Copeland responded, but what did I tell you before I got to that point? I told you the whole time, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday. Then Hilton said, but I told you you were being given immunity. Copeland said that I was pleading the fifth, so he's saying he told her he was going to do this. Hilton responded, no, you did not. Hilton then continued, and we said we could give you immunity. You said your concern is what they know about you.

And when you said that, I said, well, you know stuff about them. And then I said, whatever your concerns are, we can give you immunity. Copeland responded, so I didn't tell you I lied on them to get myself out of the situation? Hilton said, you said you were a liar. That's what you said. You said you were a liar. That's what you said. You said you were a liar. I want to take a moment to tell you about the sponsor of today's Law & Crime YouTube takeover. It is the law firm Morgan & Morgan. If you've seen our videos, you know that Morgan & Morgan

is a proud sponsor of Law & Crime and that our content proves that unfortunately, the world is not always a safe place. When you are hurt, it can be confusing, it can be really scary, and you don't always know where to turn. Well, Morgan & Morgan, America's largest injury law firm, can help you with that. They're the largest injury firm because they win a lot. And when I say a lot, I mean a lot.

Morgan & Morgan has recently received verdicts of $12.2 million in Florida, $26.2 million in Philly, and $6.8 million in New York. All of those, by the way, were significantly higher than the highest insurance offer. Also, there are zero upfront fees. You only pay Morgan & Morgan if you win. If you've ever been injured in an accident, you can check out Morgan & Morgan. You can submit a claim in eight clicks or less without having to leave your couch. To start your claim, visit www.forthepeople.com slash YouTube takeover. So basically the prosecution explained to Lil Woody that he

could not be prosecuted for state or federal crimes since he had immunity. And it didn't matter if he was asked about another crime on cross-examination. This entire thing, of course, led Brian Steele to ask for a mistrial and for Judge Glanville to recuse himself. Attorney Kayla Bumpus has also asked for a show cause hearing to be canceled and for Judge Glanville to recuse himself as well. Now another judge will decide whether Judge Glanville remains on the case. She is Judge Rachel Krause. The court further further takes and takes no position on whether attorney bumpus disclosed confidential or attorney client matters. The court takes no position on whether attorney bumpus violated the duty of

candor to other counsels involved in this case. These two questions can be resolved by the State Bar of Georgia and or our Supreme Court. Upon further review, this court will in fact enter an order sending Mr. Adams and Steele's, Mr. Weinstein and Mr. Banks' motion to recuse to another judge. And until such time as that, those two things are decided, then we'll be in recess until that time. Kayla, thanks for coming back on. What was your reaction when you saw that Judge Glanville basically paused the case, the Young Thug trial, waiting to see whether or not another judge will order him to recuse himself from the case? I think it was very shocking. I did not expect that at all, but I do think it's the right decision.

What was interesting to me is that you were supposed to be in court, along with everybody else who appeared at that ex parte hearing. You were supposed to be in court on July 3rd for a show cause hearing you were going to be required to show cause as to why you shouldn't be held in contempt basically you and everyone else who was there was under the microscope being accused almost of telling Brian Steele about this meeting so that that is now not happening. I mean, it didn't happen. And he said that's not happening now, the show cause hearing. So that had to have surprised you as well. I'm not going to say I was surprised as more as I was relieved. I had spoken with my lawyers and there was some anticipation that it may not

happen on the third. Wasn't sure that it wouldn't happen at all. And even though he said that he had no intentions or interest of moving forward, he still didn't put out an order that has essentially set me free. And even in the Judge Krause's recent order, she has stated that the state needs to respond in a written form to the motion to quash that my lawyers did file. So I'm kind of stuck still. Yeah, you are kind of stuck. And I saw that, that they said that responses from the prosecution, Judge Krause said, are um on monday by the end of the day so we now have the transcript the transcript has been released and basically we

now know what happened i mean you were brought in as you said to stand in for jonathan melnick because he was out of town so you represented little woody for that one day for that hearing you had represented him in the past on other matters but there was like a lot of confusion because little Woody said I didn't ask for immunity I didn't want to testify I was going to invoke my Fifth Amendment rights then they just give me immunity he didn't ask for it he gets on the stand and he invokes his Fifth Amendment rights he almost didn't understand what was going on. He's thrown in jail. He says he doesn't trust anybody. So take me back to that hearing

now that we have the transcript. Was it hard to counsel him through that? Well, he said he doesn't trust anybody, but the full statement is he doesn't trust anybody but her. And of course I'm her. So I do feel like I had his trust in that meeting. And I do feel like we were able to walk through the information.

It was his first time being able to truly understand what immunity was because if you recall, they just had given it to him on Friday, then they put him in jail over the weekend. And it was his first time really being able to understand what was going on as far as the immunity that was forced upon him. And it was Thursday night that he wasn't, you know, he was pretty clear, I guess, that he wasn't going to testify. He was going to invoke his Fifth Amendment rights. And then they give him immunity, I guess, either late Thursday or

Friday morning, you know, right before he's supposed to get up there and testify. You know, the hearing the last time we spoke, you said it was unfolding so fast. And really, the question is whether or not Judge Glanville should have been involved in this at all. It would be one thing if you and the prosecutors and Kenneth Copeland were all in a room together discussing this. That would probably be something that's pretty typical when somebody is subpoenaed to testify and going through these questions in this process. But the judge was actively involved in explaining what was going on, what the statute was regarding immunity, the fact that Woody could be held indefinitely because he's got immunity and he didn't want to testify.

So, I mean, the fact that Judge Glanville was there, would there be no question about this meeting and it being proper or improper had he just not been a part of it? I'm going to say that or the other option is to have had it in open court. That would have been a remedy to the ex parte as if it was an ex parte. I don't think he was wrong in explaining what immunity was. I think that that is the role of the court. It's just the manner in which he did it. So you don't think that Judge Glanville being involved was improper per se.

It's the fact that it was an ex parte hearing and the defense wasn't even notified about it. That's where the issue arises. Yes. And I think that the issue is also that it was in chambers. You know, like I said, had it been in open court, it would have been a different story had it been in a courtroom. And I think even in the transcript, ADA loves to go to a courtroom. Kayla, Judge Krause has to work with Judge Glanville. He's the chief judge down there in Fulton County. So she's got a big decision to make.

Is there any feeling among attorneys down there and attorneys involved in this about how she may rule? We haven't seen the brief from the prosecution yet. I think that we also have the issue of the motion that attorney Weinstein filed where I think that's who filed it. Correct me if I'm wrong, but we still have to see if that's even going to happen because I think they want her to even recuse herself and have a judge outside of Fulton County to rule on this issue. And I was going to ask you about that. Should a judge maybe outside of Fulton County be making this decision, in your opinion? I think that would be definitely an option. And it does seem fair because essentially

Judge Glanville is the chief judge and they all do work together. However, I don't think that that means someone in Fulton County is not able to be fair and impartial. I had asked you last time, Kayla, you know, whether or not you were the person who told Brian Steele about the ex parte meeting. I mean, are you willing to answer that question now?

Well, like I said, I'm still kind of not all the way off the hook. And I do plan on, you know, presenting my story on my own YouTube page. And I will be doing that today at six o'clock. And after that, I may be able to answer some more questions and I've gotten the clear from my attorneys. But right now, I mean, I kind of gave some answers that indicated how that went on an interview previously,

but I did speak with Brian Steele. So you're willing to say you spoke with Brian Steele, but you're not willing to say exactly what was stated. Right. All right. So basically you're just in a waiting game. Yeah. I mean, and also, you know, I think Judge Glanville made comments about leading it up to the Supreme Court and the state bar. That's a little gray area too. We don't know what that means.

And he singled you out. He said he was making no assertions about you. I wanted to ask you about that. He literally said during that hearing on Monday that he was making no assertions or claims about you and your role in this, but you had felt that he had before. So what are your feelings about him bringing you up? Well, I think he says that, but then he also says that someone presented him camera footage of me talking to four attorneys in the hallway, but I don't know what they're

tied into other than continuing to make assertions about me. Kayla Bumpus, I appreciate you coming back on and we'll look forward to what you have to say in the days ahead. I want to turn now to attorney Daryl Cohen. He practices in Fulton County and he's been following this case really closely. So Daryl, after reading the transcript, do you feel any differently about what happened than you did two weeks ago when we spoke about it? There's a bad word, it's called yo, yes and no. I am more comfortable that the transcript was released. I'm more comfortable looking at the transcript itself

and seeing what happened. Where I am still uncomfortable, very uncomfortable, is that the judge should not have been present in my view. For this to happen between the DA's office and the lawyers, that works perfectly for me. But it doesn't work at all when the defense lawyers were not aware of it. Defense lawyers became aware afterwards. And I think that's inappropriate. Kenneth Copeland, obviously, as any criminal defendant would be, he was concerned about possibly being cross-examined, according to the transcript, about other crimes that the

DA didn't know about and possibly facing charges for those crimes. The DA explained to him, look, we can't do that. You will have immunity. So it doesn't matter what they bring up on cross. We can't then go out and find other evidence to charge you. You can't be charged federally. You can't be charged in state court. So they're trying to explain to him, you just need to get up there and testify because you've been given immunity. But he was still hesitant. So did the DA, I mean, are they doing anything wrong? Because they're conveying to him what they're willing to give him for his truthful testimony. Well, in my view, that's not a correct answer. He can be prosecuted

regardless of whether the district attorney's office provides him with immunity or not. What he can't do is waive his Fifth Amendment right. So all he had to do, all that had to be explained to him was, if there is another crime or crimes, plead the Fifth Amendment. That's it, period. Isn't it true, Your Honor, with all due respect, or however he wants to phrase it i plead the fifth amendment it was also explained to him daryl that he could at any time look over to an attorney representing him and say hey can i confer with my attorney so that's also an option of course a witness normally is a witness but in this case this is a different type of witness because the circumstances are different. But when it's explained to him that if you don't understand the question, and any witness

can say, I don't understand the question, would you, Your Honor, or would you please repeat it? I don't understand it. Please explain it. But here they want that extra step to say, if you want to think it's necessary, talk to your lawyer, ask your lawyer. And that doesn't mean that you have to, now I'm extrapolating, that doesn't mean you have to stay on the witness stand and ask an open court. Your lawyer can come up and visit with you, turn off the microphones, turn off all of the media. It doesn't mean that you may not be able to go to where your lawyer is sitting. So there are all sorts of things that are unexplained. That's a long road that's winding with curveballs and no Yankees, but a few Reds, a couple of maybe knuckleballs from the old Phil Necro days. I love the baseball references, Daryl.

You're always good for something like that. So I appreciate you bringing some pizzazz to the interview. One thing that is concerning, though, is the fact that I guess the D.A. was concerned that Jonathan Melnick was not representing Kenneth Copeland's best interest, that he was communicating with Brian Steele and Max Schart, the attorneys for Young Thug and Shannon Stilwell, and basically saying, you know, this is what the DA is saying. I mean, should he be doing that when he's representing somebody who could be an adverse witness to their client? It does seem like there may have been a little bit of collusion going on there. Absolutely. But collusion can also be explained as communication. The more lawyers

that are in it, the longer case takes. And as you well know, this case is longest running case in the state of Georgia ever. And the end seems to be not in sight so the fact that he was communicating with those lawyers that doesn't bother me that's what lawyers do it's called sometimes Discovery in civil cases we don't have that Discovery in criminal here in the state of Georgia but if he chooses to communicate with them so be it interesting the DA's office can only present the case that they have. They cannot control the entire courtroom. That's up to the judge, Judge Glanville or whoever may take his place if he recuses himself or if he is recused by Judge Krause. And you make a good point there. You know, the DA can't control the courtroom. They can just control what they present in their case. And they obviously wanted Woody to testify and believe that they would be

essentially their star witness and were disappointed when he invoked his Fifth Amendment rights. Let's turn now to Judge Krause. She is the one who will have to decide whether or not Judge Glanville will have to recuse himself. and there are briefs due from the state by um monday afternoon that's when they will have to that's the deadline to submit their briefs on their position on all of this so uh we haven't read the state's brief yet but do you see this judge rachel kraus recusing or ordering judge glanville to recuse himself from this case. Because if he recuses himself, then there's a mistrial. This trial starts all over again, and he's not handling any of it.

Judge Krause is walking on the beach, and there's glass that she's walking on. So every time she steps down, she's stepping on a piece of glass that may or may not penetrate her foot, which means she's stepping on a piece of glass that may or may not penetrate her foot, which means she's walking on eggs. She has to be in the same courthouse as the chief judge, Judge Glanville. She will be very careful in whatever ruling she makes to make sure that she is protecting herself and protecting the court and she will, knowing her, and she's protecting herself and protecting the court. And she will, knowing her,

and she's as honest and ethical as it comes, she will do, in her view, the right thing. I don't know what she'll rule. We haven't seen the briefs. I know that this case may very well end in a mistrial regardless. There's so many problems that this case has encountered from all sides that none of us will be surprised

if there's an ultimate mistrial. Very interesting. Well, we will wait and see. Darrell Cohen, thank you so much for coming on. And that's it for this episode of Crime Fix. I'm Anjanette Levy. Thanks so much for being with me. I'll see you back here next time.