© 2024 WUGA | University of Georgia
Play Live Radio
Next Up:
0:00
0:00
0:00 0:00
Available On Air Stations

McBurney to keep portions of jury report confidential

In this May 2022 file photo, Fulton County Superior Court Judge Robert McBurney speaks during proceedings to seat a special purpose grand jury in Fulton County, Ga., to look into the actions of former President Donald Trump and his supporters who tried to overturn the results of the 2020 election.
Ben Gray
/
AP
In this May 2022 file photo, Fulton County Superior Court Judge Robert McBurney speaks during proceedings to seat a special purpose grand jury in Fulton County, Ga., to look into the actions of former President Donald Trump and his supporters who tried to overturn the results of the 2020 election.

Fulton County judge Robert McBurney announced Monday that he plans to keep private portions of a special grand jury report confidential.

The report, which is the result of an eight-month investigation into allegations of criminal interference by former President Donald Trump and his associates in the 2020 Georgia elections, recommends the indictment of specific individuals

The introduction, conclusion, and a section discussing the grand jury's concern of perjury during testimony, will be released on Thursday.

McBurney rejected arguments from media organizations that the final report is a court record and therefore subject to public disclosure but acknowledged that the law requires its publication if the special grand jurors recommend it.

He stated that the special purpose grand jury was under the control of the District Attorney's office, and defense attorneys were prohibited from representing the targets of the investigation.

Additionally, those who were potential defendants were unable to present evidence outside of what was requested by the DA and were unable to call their own witnesses or present mitigating evidence. These limitations were noted in the judge's written statement.

“Put differently, there was very limited due process in this process for those who might now be named as indictment-worthy in the final report,” he wrote. “That does not mean that the District Attorney’s investigative process was flawed or improper or in any way unconstitutional. By all appearances, the special purpose grand jury did its work by the book.”

The rights of future defendants also need to be protected, the McBurney noted, leading to the decision to keep the recommendations under wraps.

Related Content