The Fulton County Clerk of Courts Office is offering a new explanation for the supposed “fictitious” indictment posted on the Georgia court’s website before a grand jury voted Monday to hand up an indictment for former President Trump and 18 others.
On Monday afternoon, the Fulton County Court’s website posted a document that listed the same charges included in the indictment released late Monday night, which included charges of violating the Georgia RICO Act (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act), solicitation of violation of oath by a public officer, conspiracy to commit filing false documents and more.
Reuters first reported on the document before the Fulton County Court quickly removed it from the website and released a statement, blasting the document as “fictitious” and warning the media “that documents that do not bear an official case number, filing date, and the name of The Clerk of Courts, in concert, are not considered official filings and should not be treated as such.”
The court on Tuesday afternoon released a lengthy statement in an attempt to clear up questions.
“The Office of the Fulton County Clerk of Superior and Magistrate Courts announces that midday on August 14, 2023, a media outlet utilizing the Fulton County Press que obtained a docket sheet and shared it with other media outlets who then released the sample working document related to the former United States President, Donald Trump – reporting that an indictment had been returned by the Special Grand Jury in Fulton County Georgia,” the statement reads. “Upon learning of the mishap, Fulton County Clerk of Superior and Magistrate Courts, Ché Alexander, immediately removed the document and issued correspondence notifying the media that a fictitious document was in circulation and that no indictment had been returned by the Grand Jury.”
“In anticipation of issues that arise with entering a potentially large indictment, Alexander used charges that pre-exist in Odyssey to test the system and conduct a trial run,” the statement continues. “Unfortunately, the sample working document led to the docketing of what appeared to be an indictment, but which was, in fact, only a fictitious docket sheet.”
The court said that “because the media has access to documents before they are published, and while it may have appeared that something official had occurred because the document bore a case number and filing date, it did not include a signed ‘true’ or ‘no’ bill nor an official stamp with Clerk Alexander’s name, thereby making the document unofficial and a test sample only.”
“Hours later, after receiving the True Bill presented to presiding Judge, Robert McBurney, Clerk Alexander executed the filing with a file stamp and moments later she made the filing public,” the court continues. “The Office understands the confusion that this matter caused and the sensitivity of all court filings.”
Read the full story here.
Scroll down to leave a comment and share your thoughts.
