Harrison Floyd lawyer gets snippy as he argues over social posts sent to election worker

Ruby Freeman's lawyer clashed in court with the attorney for Harrison Floyd as a hearing on potential bond violations by the Trump co-defendant unfolded in Fulton County, Georgia, Tuesday.

At issue is whether Floyd harassed people on social media. The conditions of his release pending trial include not communicating directly or indirectly about the details of the case or with any of the co-defendants or known witnesses.

One of the people he mentioned in his posts was Freeman, an election worker who was wrongly accused of fraudulently manipulating ballots on Election Day. Former Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani has been found liable of defaming her with the claims.

The accusations were sparked by surveillance video of ballot-counting which election deniers claimed showed Freeman engaged in manipulating the count.

Her attorney Von DuBose revealed that, after his client received a flood of attacks, he hired a company that would monitor social media and issue threat reports if there was a spike in activity about her.

He revealed in court that after Floyd's comments, the threat level spiked, and they took precautions as a result to protect her.

Floyd's lawyer's questioning seemed to attempt to demean Freeman's attorney's credentials as he asked if the surveillance videos were in the public domain.

ALSO READ: Enviro congressman’s wife buys — then dumps — dozens of oil, energy and other stocks

"You have no idea whether these things are in the public domain already?" Floyd's lawyer said.

"When you say 'these things' what are you referring to?" asked DuBose.

"Miss Freeman's videos of her in the Cobb County station," the attorney said. "On body cam that night of Jan. 4 or 5, 2021."

"I don't know that for sure," said DuBose. "I don't know if they're all in the public domain."

"You're her attorney, right?" the Floyd lawyer asked. "Charged with protecting her?"

He went on, "So you're representing her as counsel and you haven't researched what is out in the public domain about her?"

"That's not accurate," DuBose responded.

"Well, you don't know if any of the Cobb County videos are in the public domain," Floyd's lawyer shot back.

"That's not accurate," DuBose said.

The judge shut down the debate.

"Nothing in the posts that you've seen constitutes a threat under Georgia law, does it?" Floyd's lawyer asked.

"Which posts are you talking about," asked DuBose.

"The posts that the state showed you about Miss Freeman," he replied.

"You're going to have to show me which law you're talking about, I'm not sure what you mean when you're trying to say a threat under Georgia law," DuBose answered.

"You're an attorney, right?" asked Floyd's lawyer.

"Civil attorney," DuBose agreed.

"Civil attorney — but you know what it means when you say threats, don't you?" Floyd's lawyer said with a grin.

"I'm very particular about Georgia law," said DuBose.

"So, you don't know what a threat is?" asked Floyd's lawyer.

Floyd's lawyer claimed nothing in Floyd's social media posts constituted a threat to Freeman, which DuBose disagreed to.

Floyd's lawyer argued that no people felt a threat as a result of what Floyd had tweeted. He argued that just because Floyd tagged people doesn't mean that it's communication, particularly with Jenna Ellis because she has millions of followers so she wouldn't have noticed it.

Judge Scott F. McAfee wasn't buying it, saying that communicating with people like Freeman about the case is prohibited. Communicating about videos, however, was in the public domain, and thus, he said, that he could comment on it under the First Amendment.

McAfee eventually ruled that, though Floyd had violated his bail terms, it would not be revoked.