Defense attorneys Scott Grubman, Manny Arora, and Robert Wilson discuss Kenneth Chesebro's upcoming trial, debating his speedy trial rights and the merits of pending motions. They delve into the charges against Chesebro, the role of intent and corruption in the case, the continuity of the conspiracy, and the challenge against the Rico charge. They also discuss the prospects of a settlement and express readiness for trial.
Kenneth Chesebro demanded a speedy trial to separate himself from the politically charged case and alleviate the disruption it has caused in his life.
Ken Chesebro took on the case due to his background and interest in resolving issues related to presidential elections, motivated by his understanding of the law and desire to provide solutions within the electoral process.
The defense team challenges the Rico charges against Chesebro, arguing that they lack the elements of pecuniary gain or physical harm and that the statutes are intended for organized crime and financial fraud, not election-related disputes.
Deep dives
Reasons for demanding a speedy trial
Kenneth Chesborough, not being a politician but a lawyer, demanded a speedy trial to separate himself from the politically charged case. The goal was to get the case behind him as quickly as possible due to the immense impact it has had on his life. As the trial could potentially take months, exercising the right to a speedy trial was crucial for Chesborough to move forward and alleviate the disruption it has caused.
Ken Chesborough's role as an election lawyer
Ken Chesborough, with expertise in constitutional and election law, took on the case due to his background and interest in resolving issues related to presidential elections. He had been involved in previous election disputes, including the 2000 election dispute between Bush and Gore, representing the Gore campaign. When the issues arose in the 2020 election, Chesborough's legal knowledge prompted his involvement as he aimed to address the legal rights of the Trump campaign. His motivation was based on his understanding of the law and his desire to provide solutions within the framework of the electoral process.
Challenging the Rico charges
The defense team has raised strong arguments challenging the Rico charges brought against Ken Chesborough. They argue that the Rico statute in Georgia requires the presence of pecuniary gain or physical harm as motivation, and none of these elements are present in Chesborough's case. The defense contends that Rico is intended to address organized crime and financial fraud, not election-related disputes. By asserting that Chesborough's actions were guided by legal advice and not unlawful intent, they aim to undermine the basis for the Rico charges and highlight the lack of connection to the statutory requirements for pecuniary gain or physical harm.
Prosecution focuses on intent and burden of proof
The podcast episode discusses the importance of intent and burden of proof in the case against Ken Chesborough. The defense argues that without evidence of corrupt intent, it is unjust to prosecute Chesborough for providing legal advice. The state must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Chesborough acted with unlawful intent. The defense emphasizes that the case boils down to whether the state can establish unlawful intent, and they are prepared to challenge the government's burden of proof during the trial.
Key motions and challenges regarding the indictment
The podcast covers various motions and challenges made by the defense regarding the indictment. One significant motion challenges the indictment based on the supremacy clause and federal law versus state law. The defense argues that the state's indictment lacks pecuniary gain or physical threat/harm elements. They assert that the indictment should focus more on the core motivations of the alleged conspiracy. The defense also challenges the continuity aspect in the Rico statute, arguing that it does not apply to the case and the conspiracy was a discrete, closed conspiracy. Ultimately, the defense aims to dismiss the charges against Chesborough and highlights concerns regarding the broad use of the Rico statute.
Next month, Kenneth Chesebro—the alleged architect of the fake electors plot—is set to be tried in Fulton County, Georgia, on racketeering and other charges. This week, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes and Lawfare Legal Fellow and Courts Correspondent Anna Bower sat down with Chesebro’s defense attorneys, Scott Grubman, Manny Arora, and Robert Wilson. In a wide-ranging conversation, they discussed why Chesebro demanded a speedy trial, debated the merits of several pending motions, and chatted about the prospect of a settlement in Chesebro’s case.
