Fulton County Superior Court

***EFILED***FD
Date: 11/15/2023 3:36 PM
Che Alexander, Clerk

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF FULTON COUNTY

STATE OF GEORGIA

STATE OF GEORGIA |
| CASE NO.
v. |
| 23SC188947
DONALD JOHN TRUMP, |
RUDOLPH WILLIAM LOUIS GIULIANI, |
JOHN CHARLES EASTMAN, |
MARK RANDALL MEADOWS, |
KENNETH JOHN CHESEBRO, |
JEFFREY BOSSERT CLARK, |
JENNA LYNN ELLIS, |
RAY STALLINGS SMITH III, |
ROBERT DAVID CHEELEY, |
MICHAEL A. ROMAN, |
DAVID JAMES SHAFER, |
SHAWN MICAH TRESHER STILL, |
STEPHEN CLIFFGARD LEE, |
HARRISON WILLIAM PRESCOTT FLOYD, |
TREVIAN C. KUTTI, |
SIDNEY KATHERINE POWELL, |
CATHLEEN ALSTON LATHAM, |
SCOTT GRAHAM HALL, |
MISTY HAMPTON a/k/a EMILY MISTY HAYES |
Defendants. |

STATE’S MOTION TO REVOKE BOND CONCERNING

DEFENDANT HARRISON WILLIAM PRESCOTT FLOYD

COMES NOW, the State of Georgia, by and through Fulton County District Attorney

Fani T. Willis, and requests that this Court enter an order revoking the bond previously granted to

Defendant Harrison William Prescott Floyd and in support says as follows:

1. On August 14, 2023, a Fulton County grand jury returned an indictment charging the

Defendant with Violation of the Georgia RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt

Organizations) Act in violation of O.C.G.A. § 16-14-4(c), Conspiracy to Commit

Solicitation of False Statements and Writings in violation of O.C.G.A. §§ 16-4-8, 16-4-7,

 & 16-10-20, and Influencing Witnesses in violation of O.C.G.A. § 16-10-93(b)(1)(A). On

August 24, 2023, the Defendant surrendered to the Fulton County Jail, prior to bond

being set, and was booked in pursuant to a grand jury warrant.

2. On August 29, 2023, the Court entered a consent bond order, See Exhibit A, “Consent

Bond Order,” setting bail and ordering the Defendant to comply with certain conditions

of release, including, without limitation, the following:

a. The Defendant shall perform no act to intimidate any person known to him to be a

codefendant or witness in this case or to otherwise obstruct the administration of

justice.

b. The Defendant shall not communicate in any way, directly or indirectly, about the

facts of this case with any person known to him or her to be a codefendant in this

case except through his or her counsel.

c. The Defendant shall not communicate in any way, directly or indirectly, about the

facts of this case with any person known to him or her to be a witness in this case

except through his or her counsel.

3. Since his release from custody, the Defendant has engaged in numerous intentional and

flagrant violations of the conditions of release ordered by the Court.

4. Since November 1, 2023, the Defendant has publicly tweeted multiple times from the

Twitter account @hw_floyd in an effort to intimidate codefendants and witnesses, to

communicate directly and indirectly with codefendants and witnesses, and to otherwise

obstruct the administration of justice. The Defendant’s Twitter account has

approximately 25,000 followers who can view his public tweets.

2
5. On November 1, 2023, the Defendant tweeted the following to witnesses Brad

Raffensperger and Gabriel Sterling and tagged their Twitter accounts, which constituted

an act to intimidate known witnesses and direct communication with known witnesses

about the facts of the case, in violation of conditions of release:

6. On November 6, 2023, the Defendant participated in a video-recorded and widely

disseminated interview on the Conservative Daily podcast. During the interview, the

Defendant discussed the facts of this case and communicated indirectly to codefendant

and witness Jenna Ellis by discussing her guilty plea, in violation of conditions of release.

The Defendant stated the following:

President Trump was underserved by people like her. People who would go
into the Oval Office and tell him one thing and then behind his back they
would do another … I’m not a lawyer. I’m not a Harvard J.D. But guess
who is? Jenna Ellis, right. She literally, if she truly believed everything that
she was saying, she could have defended her own self. She didn’t need a
quarter of a million dollars of people’s hard-earned money to be raised
offline. You know? And it doesn’t take a quarter of a million dollars to
accept a plea deal either. Or to deny one. Ok? So she just showed who she
really is.

3
7. In addition to participating in the above referenced interview, on November 6, 2023, the

Defendant tweeted the following link to the interview to amplify its viewership:

4
8. On November 7, 2023, the Defendant tweeted the following to witnesses Brad

Raffensperger and Gabriel Sterling and tagged their Twitter accounts, which constituted

an act to intimidate known witnesses and direct communication with known witnesses

about the facts of the case, in violation of conditions of release:

5
9. On November 7, 2023, the Defendant tweeted the following to witnesses Brad

Raffensperger and Gabriel Sterling and tagged their Twitter accounts, which constituted

an act to intimidate known witnesses and direct communication with known witnesses

about the facts of the case, in violation of conditions of release:

6
10. On November 8, 2023, the Defendant tweeted the following to witness Brad

Raffensperger and tagged his Twitter account, which constituted an act to intimidate a

known witness and direct communication with a known witness about the facts of the

case, in violation of conditions of release:

7
11. On November 13, 2023, the Defendant tweeted the following to codefendant and witness

Jenna Ellis and to witness Dan Scavino and tagged their Twitter accounts, which

constituted an act to intimidate a known codefendant and witnesses and direct

communication with a known codefendant and witnesses about the facts of the case, in

violation of conditions of release:

8
12. On November 13, 2023, the Defendant tweeted the following about codefendants and

witnesses Jenna Ellis and Sidney Powell, which constituted an act to intimidate known

codefendants and witnesses and indirect communication with known codefendants and

witnesses about the facts of the case, in violation of conditions of release:

9
13. On November 14, 2023, the Defendant tweeted the following about witness Ruby

Freeman, which constituted an act to intimidate a known witness and indirect

communication with a known witness about the facts of the case, in violation of

conditions of release:

14. Approximately one hour later, the Defendant posted a comment that stated, “So this begs

the question … If Ruby Freeman didn’t trust White people to help her ………… What

did she say to the black people that offered to help her? I’ll wait for you to get your�
�.”

This constituted an act to intimidate a known witness and indirect communication with a

known witness about the facts of the case, in violation of conditions of release.

10
15. On November 14, 2023, the Defendant tweeted the following about witness Ruby

Freeman, which constituted an act to intimidate a known witness and indirect

communication with a known witness about the facts of the case, in violation of

conditions of release:

11
16. On November 14, 2023, the Defendant tweeted the following about witness Ruby

Freeman, which constituted an act to intimidate a known witness and indirect

communication with a known witness about the facts of the case, in violation of

conditions of release:

12
17. On November 14, 2023, the Defendant tweeted the following about witness Ruby

Freeman, which constituted an act to intimidate a known witness and indirect

communication with a known witness about the facts of the case, in violation of

conditions of release:

13
18. On November 14, 2023, the Defendant tweeted the following about witness Ruby

Freeman, which constituted an act to intimidate a known witness and indirect

communication with a known witness about the facts of the case, in violation of

conditions of release:

14
19. On November 14, 2023, the Defendant tweeted the following about witness Ruby

Freeman, which constituted an act to intimidate a known witness and indirect

communication with a known witness about the facts of the case, in violation of

conditions of release:

15
20. On November 14, 2023, the Defendant tweeted the following about witness Ruby

Freeman, which constituted an act to intimidate a known witness and indirect

communication with a known witness about the facts of the case, in violation of

conditions of release:

16
21. On November 14, 2023, the Defendant tweeted the following about witness Ruby

Freeman, which constituted an act to intimidate a known witness and indirect

communication with a known witness about the facts of the case, in violation of

conditions of release:

22. As detailed in paragraphs 13-21 above, witness Ruby Freeman has been a frequent target

of the Defendant’s intimidating communications. In Count 31 of the indictment, the

Defendant is charged with Influencing Witnesses in violation of O.C.G.A. § 16-10-

93(b)(1)(A) involving witness Ruby Freeman herself. Because of and in response to the

17
 Defendant’s intimidating communications, witness Ruby Freeman has been the subject of

renewed threats of violence from third parties.

23. As set forth above, since his release from custody, the Defendant has engaged in a pattern

of intimidation toward known codefendants and witnesses, direct and indirect

communication about the facts of this case to known codefendants and witnesses, and

obstruction of the administration of justice in direct violation of this Court’s order.

24. Moreover, the Defendant’s actions demonstrate that he poses a significant threat of

intimidating witnesses and otherwise obstructing the administration of justice in the

future, making him ineligible for bond. Ayala v. State, 262 Ga. 704, 705 (1993).

25. Accordingly, the State requests that this Court enter an order revoking the bond

previously granted to Defendant Harrison William Prescott Floyd.

Respectfully submitted this 15th day of November 2023,

__________________________________
FANI T. WILLIS
Georgia Bar No. 223955
District Attorney
Atlanta Judicial Circuit
136 Pryor Street SW, 3rd Floor
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
[email protected]

18
Exhibit A

19
 Fulton County Superior Court
***EFILED***FD
Date: 8/29/2023 3:15 PM
Che Alexander, Clerk

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF FULTON COUNTY

STATE OF GEORGIA

STATE OF GEORGIA )
) Case No. 238C188947
V. )
) Judge: Scott McAfee
HARRISON WILLIAM PRESCOTT FLOYD _ )

CONSENT BOND ORDER FOR

DEFENDANT HARRISON WILLIAM PRESCOTT FLOYD

The above-captioned matter having come before the Court for consideration of bond, and

with consent of counsel for the State of Georgia and for the Defendant, the Court hereby

GRANTS and ORDERS that bond is set in this matter as follows:

(1) Bond Amount:

Count 1: Violation of GA RICO Act $40,000

Count 30: Conspiracy to Commit Solicitation of False $30,000
Statements and Writings
Count 31: Influencing Witnesses $30,000

TOTAL: $100,000

Defendant may post bond as cash, through commercial surety, or through the Fulton
County Jail 10% program.

(2) The Defendant shall report to pre-trial supervision every 30 days and may report by
telephone.

(3) The Defendant shall not violate the laws of this State, the laws of any other state, the laws
of the United States of America, or any other local laws. Ayala v. State, 262 Ga. 704, 705
(1993).

(4) The Defendant shall appear in court as directed by the Court. Jd.

(5) The Defendant shall perform no act to intimidate any person known to him to be a
codefendant or witness in this case or to otherwise obstruct the administration of justice.
Td.
 (6) The Defendant shall not communicate in any way, directly or indirectly, about the facts of
this case with any person known to him or her to be a codefendant in this case except
through his or her counsel.

(7) The Defendant shall not communicate in any way, directly or indirectly, about the facts of
this case with any person known to him or her to be a witness in this case except through
his or her counsel.

It is so ORDERED this the_Z/”” day of August, 2023,

PA

Hon. Scott McAfee; Judge

Fulton County Superior Court

Consented to by:

Deputy District Attorney Grant Rood Counsel for Defendant

Fulton County District Attorney’s Office ee

Cr br No Aa fer
Counsel for the State of Georgia ty ,
 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF FULTON COUNTY
STATE OF GEORGIA

STATE OF GEORGIA |
| CASE NO.
v. |
| 23SC188947
DONALD JOHN TRUMP, |
RUDOLPH WILLIAM LOUIS GIULIANI, |
JOHN CHARLES EASTMAN, |
MARK RANDALL MEADOWS, |
KENNETH JOHN CHESEBRO, |
JEFFREY BOSSERT CLARK, |
JENNA LYNN ELLIS, |
RAY STALLINGS SMITH III, |
ROBERT DAVID CHEELEY, |
MICHAEL A. ROMAN, |
DAVID JAMES SHAFER, |
SHAWN MICAH TRESHER STILL, |
STEPHEN CLIFFGARD LEE, |
HARRISON WILLIAM PRESCOTT FLOYD, |
TREVIAN C. KUTTI, |
SIDNEY KATHERINE POWELL, |
CATHLEEN ALSTON LATHAM, |
SCOTT GRAHAM HALL, |
MISTY HAMPTON a/k/a EMILY MISTY HAYES |
Defendants. |

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that I have this day served a copy of this STATE’S MOTION TO REVOKE

BOND CONCERNING DEFENDANT HARRISON WILLIAM PRESCOTT FLOYD, upon all

counsel who have entered appearances as counsel of record in this matter via the Fulton County e-

filing system.

This 15th day of November 2023,

__________________________________
FANI T. WILLIS
Georgia Bar No. 223955
District Attorney

20
 Atlanta Judicial Circuit
136 Pryor Street SW, 3rd Floor
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
[email protected]

21