In the ongoing investigation concerning classified documents at Mar-a-Lago, a key witness has reportedly struck a "non-prosecution agreement" with federal prosecutors, according to a court document submitted by his previous lawyer on Tuesday.
The agreement was reached following threats from special counsel Jack Smith's office to prosecute the witness for perjury before the grand jury. The court document, penned by the witness's former defense attorney Stanley Woodward, reveals that the individual, identified by CNN as IT professional Yuscil Taveras and referred to as Trump Employee 4 in the document, consented to provide testimony in the classified documents case in return for immunity from prosecution.
Prosecutors have raised concerns about a potential conflict of interest involving Woodward, who currently represents Trump valet Walt Nauta, another defendant in the case. They argue that Woodward may face a conflict if he is required to cross-examine his former client, Taveras.
In the court document, Woodward stated that he had "played no role" in Taveras' decision to cooperate with the prosecution. He further clarified that Taveras was not offered the non-prosecution agreement until after he had secured a different attorney. Woodward has requested the judge to prevent Taveras from testifying at the trial.
CNN reports that Taveras' testimony in July led to fresh allegations being included in the superseding indictment filed that month against Trump and Nauta. The special counsel team alleged in court documents that Taveras had "repeatedly denied or claimed not to recall any contacts or conversations about the security footage at Mar-a-Lago." However, in July, court documents suggested that Taveras had altered his narrative and "retracted his prior false testimony and provided information that implicated Nauta, [Carlos] De Oliveira, and Trump in efforts to delete security camera footage."
In an August filing, Woodward argued that Taveras' revised testimony should not be admissible in court as it was procured through "improper use of out-of-district proceedings" in Washington, DC. He further stated that the attempt to use this testimony as evidence was "nothing less than an attempt to diminish the [Florida] Courts authority over the proceedings in this case."
Login