Crime Fix with Angenette Levy - Young Thug Judge Kicked Off YSL Trial: 'Thank God!

Starting point is 00:00:00 Wondery Plus subscribers can binge all episodes of this Law & Crimes series ad-free right now. Join Wondery Plus in the Wondery app, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify. This is a huge win. Following a controversy over an ex parte meeting in chambers, the judge in Young Thug's RICO trial is off the case after one of his colleagues orders him to step aside. I don't see how you rewind this case to June the 12th. I look at what's next for the months-long RICO trial and talk with one of the lawyers caught up in the controversy.

Starting point is 00:00:34 Plus, what does Young Thug's lawyer have to say about a new judge coming on board? I definitely anticipate motions for mistrial, motions being filed for a mistrial. Welcome to Crime Fix. I'm Anjanette Levy. Judge Uriel Glanville is no longer presiding over the RICO trial of Jeffrey Williams, who's better known as rapper Young Thug. I'm going to go through the order for Glanville's recusal, but first, a quick recap on how we got to this point. It became clear that Glanville's days of overseeing the case might be numbered on June 10th when he held Williams' lawyer, Brian Steele, in contempt after Steele questioned why Glanville didn't tell him about an ex parte meeting in chambers with the state's star witness, Kenneth Little Woody Copeland, and prosecutors. Mr. Steele, I am going to hold you under,

Starting point is 00:01:22 still hold you in summary criminal contempt. The Fulton County DA's office maintained there was nothing improper about this meeting. We certainly have the right to request ex parte communications. That's why we ask that the court reporter be present. This is a matter that the defendants did not have a right to be a part of. After Steele was held in contempt, he appealed and received a supersedious bond so he wouldn't have to go to jail. That appeal is still pending. The trial continued, but you could tell things appeared to be pretty strained. Steele and attorney Doug Weinstein, who represents defendant Diamante Yacgabi Kendrick, filed motions asking

Starting point is 00:02:06 Glanville to recuse himself. Glanville eventually asked another judge to weigh in on whether or not he should be recused. 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. Judge Rachel Krause got the case and made her decision rather quickly. In a 10-page order, Judge Krause cited case law to support her decision that Judge Glanville should be recused. Judges shall disqualify themselves in any proceeding in which their impartiality might be reasonably questioned. Judge Krause continued, a judge has no interest in sitting on a particular case at most. His

Starting point is 00:02:51 interest lies in protecting his own reputation. His efforts at defending himself against a motion to recuse will inevitably create an appearance of partiality. One reason is that if he defends himself, he becomes an adversary of the movement for recusal. This adversarial posture may create an antipathy, which persists after the motion to recuse is denied. Judge Krause wrote that there were three criteria for determining whether a judge should recuse himself or herself.

Starting point is 00:03:21 In transferring the case to another judge for consideration, Judge Glanville necessarily determined that the third criteria was satisfied, i.e., that recusal might be authorized if the facts alleged in the motion were assumed true. Once the motions to recuse were filed, Judge Glanville couldn't argue against them. He's essentially prohibited from doing so. Judge Krause wrote, a judge cannot become actively involved in presenting evidence or argument against a motion seeking his recusal without that defense itself becoming a basis for recusal. So what did Judge Krause think about the ex parte meeting? She appeared to choose her words very carefully. It is worth noting that this court

Starting point is 00:04:02 agrees generally with Judge Glanville's assessment of the propriety of the ex parte meeting. While the meeting could have and perhaps should have taken place in open court, nothing about the fact of the meeting or the substance discussed was inherently improper. However, in his order denying defendant Kendrick's motion and in the process of making his record on July 1st, 2024, Judge Glanville added facts, provided context, questioned the veracity of the allegations, and otherwise explained his decisions and actions and argued why those actions were proper. So Judge Krause basically said in that last part that Judge Glanville may have crossed the line when he tried to explain himself. In granting the motion to recuse, Krause wrote, this court has no doubt that Judge Glanville can and would continue presiding fairly

Starting point is 00:04:50 over this matter if the recusal motions were denied, but the necessity of preserving the public's confidence in the judicial system weighs in favor of excusing Judge Glanville from further handling of this case. Kayla Bumpus represented Kenneth Little Woody Copeland during that ex parte meeting in Judge Glanville's chambers. She was one of the people ordered to show cause as to why she shouldn't be held in contempt for disclosing the information. I spoke to her about Judge Krause's decision. I think it was the right thing to do. I think it's a step in the right direction for these guys to begin to get a fair trial. Judge Krause ruled that the show cause order related to Kayla Bumpus was moot.

Starting point is 00:05:34 Glanville had mentioned that he saw Bumpus on surveillance video talking to defense attorneys. This is her response to that. Judge Glanville, you know, I can't remember if we talked after this, but I think we did. I mean, he put on the record that I'm on camera talking to Attorney Steele. So there's no question that me and Attorney Steele and other members of the defense team, Attorney Weinstein, there's no question that we had a conversation and I never denied having a conversation with them. So yes, of course I talked to them and I did tell them things that happened in that meeting. But if I had a chance to do it all over, I'd do it the same way. But back to the RICO trial and the motion to recuse being granted.

Starting point is 00:06:18 Judge Shakira Ingram has been randomly selected to preside over the trial. I definitely anticipate motions for mistrial, motions being filed for a mistrial. I can't see anything other than that happening next. How does a judge come in and take over in the middle of something like this that has gone on now for so long? And for me, it's not necessarily just about the judge. It's more about the jury. I mean, how do they know what parts to trust what parts not to trust there's no way that they're going to not know that Judge Glavio was recused there they just can't show up one day and then there's a new judge I mean they have been

Starting point is 00:06:56 sitting in this courtroom watching a lot of these motions and hearing a lot of this stuff and you know it's just the the jury is like the big thing here and we know it took 10 months to get that jury so it's even if they retry it I mean then how long do we have to wait for another jury I'm excited to see what motions are filed I'm excited to see what happens next I hope that if they do continue to move forward, that at least these guys are given bonds, the ones that, you know, qualify for bonds. Of course, we have rules that come with bonds, but I think that some of them definitely should have been given a bond from the beginning. And if they do choose to continue to move forward, I hope that Judge Ingram at least considers to give these guys a

Starting point is 00:07:45 bond. Attorney Doug Weinstein represents defendant Diamante Yakgadi Kendrick and had filed a motion seeking Judge Glanville's recusal. This is a huge win. This is a huge win because, look, again, I'm going to say what I keep saying and I keep saying it because it's the truth. I do respect Chief Judge Glanville. He has a great reputation. He's done tremendous service to this community and through his military service. So I have a lot of respect for Judge Glanville. But at some point, I think any dispassionate observer of this trial on your network or anywhere else can see that. Unfortunately, I think the judge has let bias creep in. And so I firmly believe that if this case were to proceed with an unbiased judge, we would get justice. We would get the outcome that our clients and Mr. Kendrick. And again, I'm just speaking for

Starting point is 00:08:41 me, but that Mr. Kendrick deserves. So this is a huge win. Unfortunately, the world is not always a safe place and accidents can happen. That's why I want to talk to you about Morgan & Morgan, a sponsor of Crime Fix. Morgan & Morgan has more than 1,000 attorneys that you may want in your corner because they are America's largest injury firm. And for good good reason they win a lot they've secured several multi-million dollar verdicts and settlements recently for victims who were in life-altering car crashes all of which were considerably higher than the highest insurance offer starting a claim takes eight clicks or less and it can all be done from your smartphone it's very easy there are no upfront fees and you only pay if

Starting point is 00:09:25 you win. So if you're injured, you can easily start a claim in eight clicks or less. Just log on to ForThePeople.com slash CrimeFix. So what does Brian Steele, the attorney for Jeffrey Williams, young thug, have to say about this? I'll get to that in a moment. Lawrence Zimmerman represented Jeffrey Williams's younger brother, Quantavious Greer, at the beginning of this case. So Lawrence, thanks so much for joining me. Your thoughts on Judge Krause telling Judge Glanville that he has to recuse himself. Thank God. It's good to see that justice has been done. This has been a long time coming this has been a slog this has been one of those unfair unjust what other words that put up the source i keep going all day to anything that is synonymous with unfairness and injustice injustice been a horrible trial uh forget how

Starting point is 00:10:21 the lawyers have been treated these jurors have been treated poorly I mean stuck in a trial it's already gone on for about a year and a half breaks non-stop they don't know what's happening it's been just just insane to watch the whole thing I haven't talked to any current or retired judge who didn't think when I told them that jury selection took 10 months that didn't think it was absurd they couldn't believe it that you would take 10 months to select a jury and then have the trial drag out in the way that it has so what do you see coming next because a new judge is going to have to come in after all of this judge Ingram look at the transcripts, I'm assuming, look at everything that's unfolded and look at little Woody's testimony and everything

Starting point is 00:11:12 that happened with that and then decide, do we just pick it back up? What do you see happening? Because I feel like this is such a mess just looking at it from the outside in i don't see how you just keep going with everything that has happened well first there's still a pending motion that brian steele filed to recuse the fulton county district attorney's office so that hasn't even been dealt with yet so first they're gonna have to deal with that number one um he's alleging it was completely unprofessional um and unlawful quote you know unlawfully ethically to be in that meeting ex parte without telling anybody with the judge with woody kenneth copeland so you have to deal with that but so your larger question this

Starting point is 00:12:02 is actually uncharted territory i I'm not sure there's many cases we could find around the country where a judge has been removed, where they didn't drop dead didn't get really sick in the middle of a trial, especially trials going on this long. I've asked a lot of other lawyers, nobody really knows of one and most were sort of the opinion they didn't think that the judge would be removed because how do you remove a judge from the middle of a trial, especially like one this large? And to your point, how is Judge Ingram going to catch up on the case?

Starting point is 00:12:35 Does she need to read from day one the openings? Or can she just basically say, I have a pretty good idea and understanding of what the case is about, just jump right in? I don't know. I mean, if she has to read the transcripts, it's going to take another six months till this case starts back up then what I could say this I'm I absolutely absolutely I'm certain that defense is going to renew and file more bond motions to get the clients out of bond because Judge Glanville

Starting point is 00:13:01 denied every single person to bond to this case. And honestly, there was no basis for that. There were people involved in this case that were on the periphery that have never been in trouble before that didn't get bonds, she denied bond to everybody. So I mean, this is uncharted territory. Brian Steele released a statement last night. His wife, Colette Steele, who's also an attorney who practices with him, sent it over. Jeffrey Williams is innocent of the charges brought in this indictment. And to clear his name, he sought a speedy trial, one in which he would receive the constitutional guarantees of a fair trial with an impartial judge presiding and ethical prosecutors following the

Starting point is 00:13:39 law. Sadly, Judge Glanville and the prosecutors have run afoul of their duties under the law. Mr. Williams is grateful that the reviewing court agreed with him and entered the order recusing and disqualifying Judge Glanville from presiding over Mr. Williams's case. We look forward to proceeding with a trial judge who will fairly and faithfully follow the law. So he makes it sound like maybe the trial should keep going. But wouldn't you anticipate maybe he would want a mistrial after all of this? So he makes it sound like maybe the trial should keep going. But wouldn't you anticipate maybe he would want a mistrial after all of this? Well, sure.

Starting point is 00:14:09 If he gets a mistrial, that'd be great because there'd be double jeopardy issues. And Brian would argue that the district attorney goaded him into moving for a mistrial to then later bar the trial again. Brian wants a fair trial. I mean, in full disclosure, he's one of my very close friends. I rented space from him and his wife for 15 years. So, and I'm a little biased, but I will tell you, and I know, there's no lawyer that works harder than him, that fights harder. I mean, nobody. He is one of the smartest people. He's the most successful appellate lawyer in criminal cases in the state of Georgia.

Starting point is 00:14:41 And he's a fantastic person. And it breaks my heart to see how this judge has run roughshod over him and just maybe even one time called him unprepared calling brian steele unprepared is like saying the sun isn't hot so judge glanville really really messed this case up and he really showed his true colors and i'm glad brian's still standing tall and he's going to fight for jeffrey williams not going to take a plea. He wants his case to come to a logical conclusion with a not guilty. But sure, a mistrial, they'll have to retry it again. Maybe that's what they'd want. But I think they want to just get through this case.

Starting point is 00:15:14 I don't watch his case every day. I catch his summaries. My paralegal is pretty involved in this case as well. But she tells me what's going on. I've yet to see where anybody could tie Jeffrey Williams to any crimes. It's been pretty much to do about nothing so far. Whatever the salaciousness of the events are,

Starting point is 00:15:32 the people involved, but I can't see a jury of 12 all agreeing to convict Jeffrey Williams, if they even remember the evidence in another year. So what do you see happening with the motion to recuse the Fulton County DA's office? That's going to be a tough call because, I mean, certainly if they recuse the Fulton DA's office, the case is definitely over. You know, Judge Krause, I read her order right when it came out yesterday.

Starting point is 00:15:59 It's a decent order. I felt she had courage. I think she was sort of toeing the line not to completely criticize the chief judge of Fulton County. I don't think she wanted to embarrass him. I mean, she even dropped some language in there about ex parte. It could have been done in a better way in open court. I'm not so sure an ex parte, the way that it all occurred, could have been done at all, lest the defense was present or notified.

Starting point is 00:16:21 Certainly, the ex parte couldn't have been done with a district attorney's office in a closed hearing without anybody else present, that's not allowed. I remember Kat Copeland was under oath when Judge Glanville spoke with him. So these are all issues that Judge Krause is going to have to bear it out and determine whether the DA's office should be allowed to stay on the case because they had very unclean hands at this point. Well, Judge Krause didn't completely disagree with the fact that an ex parte meeting could have occurred. She said that, but you're right.

Starting point is 00:16:54 I feel like she was trying to be very careful not to criticize Judge Glanville. What do you know about Judge Shakira Ingram? I've only had one case with her recently i thought her would be very nice professional um you know i didn't have any rulings or any litigation the case resolved very favorably for us um but she's listen i just want to judge who's kind and professional to start with um certainly one that understands the law and makes good rulings, but you just want a judge to have a good temperament. You were there doing the people's work. You're not a king.

Starting point is 00:17:30 You're elected by the people. You're paid by the government. And people want to have assurances that the court system, the criminal legal system is working in the way it was designed, which we all know it doesn't work the way it should, but you certainly want judges up there calling balls and strikes. You don't want them favoring the Yankees over the Red Sox, right? You want them to be the umpires who will be ethical and neutral when calling the game. And that's not what happened with Judge Glanville. If you watch the case, every time brian would ask a question the prosecutor um adrian love would just object just to just to

Starting point is 00:18:10 object all the time even objections i don't even never even heard of and judge glenville will sustain them i mean and i let's stop if i'm ranting but if you look at my client jimmy winfrey who i represent in 2015 he took a plea against my advice, by the way. I didn't participate in the plea. It's a whole other story. But he pled an Alford plea. He didn't admit to anything. That case then got overturned on appeal by the Supreme Court because the judge threatened him. That's, I refused to participate. Got overturned. The state of Georgia in this Young Thug at All case tried to use that guilty plea as an omission about YSL in Jeffrey Williams' case and Brian objected. The Supreme Court vacated that conviction, said he was coerced.

Starting point is 00:19:00 That can't come in. But Judge Glanville still let it in. I'm actually on the witness list in this case because of that. So it's crazy. You can't, I mean, if something gets thrown out, you can't admit that into court. So my point is the bias is ridiculous. That's not how court should work. That's how judges should be. Let me just say one more thing. I can't tell you how many judges around the state of Georgia stop me all the time.

Starting point is 00:19:22 They just ask me, what is going on there in Fulton County. I can't believe what this judge is doing. We've never heard of this before. I'm judges texting me. And just so our viewers and listeners know, an Alford plea is a plea agreement in which a defendant can say, yes, there's enough evidence where I might be found guilty. I will plead guilty or plead no contest really. And just acknowledge there is enough evidence for a conviction, but I maintain that I didn't do anything wrong. Essentially, that's right. That's right. I can play the things after he his first plea got vacated when I represented him and then I referred it to another lawyer for the appeal. They won that appeal. He pled guilty again, but he did it out for the second time. So neither of those come in at all. And then Judge Blamill let both those in. And the law

Starting point is 00:20:08 is pretty clear. We have a lawyer like Brian Steele telling you, here's the law. And he's the most wittingness, that's a word, appellate lawyer in Georgia. You should probably listen to him. He's usually right. Well, we will keep an eye on what happens next. Lawrence Zimmerman, thank you so much for joining us. Thank you for having me. I really appreciate you. Appreciate you. And that's it for this episode of Crime Fix. I'm Annette Levy. Thanks so much for being with me. I'll see you back here next time.

Pet Camera - EBO Air 2

Crime Fix with Angenette Levy - Young Thug Judge Kicked Off YSL Trial: 'Thank God!

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.

Your Ad Here

Pet Camera - EBO Air 2

Crime Fix with Angenette Levy - Young Thug Judge Kicked Off YSL Trial: 'Thank God!

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.