By giving a series of media interviews this week, the forewoman of the Georgia special grand jury that investigated former President Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election has likely created headaches for Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, former federal prosecutors say.

In interviews with the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, CNN, NBC News and The New York Times, Emily Kohrs revealed the special grand jury recommended multiple indictments and suggested “the big name” — presumably Trump — could be on the list.

In its final report, sections of which were unsealed last week, the grand jury said it believes “one or more witnesses” committed perjury during its seven-month investigation and urged Willis to “seek appropriate indictments for such crimes where the evidence is compelling.” Kohrs hinted in a CNN interview Tuesday that the recommended charges extended beyond perjury. Neither the report nor Kohrs have named those who the grand jury believes may have committed crimes.

The special grand jury did not have indictment powers. Willis will decide whether to present any of the recommended charges to a regular grand jury. She said last month a decision on whether to seek indictments is “imminent.”

Fulton County Superior Court Judge Robert McBurney did not bar grand jurors from speaking publicly about the proceedings, but he advised them not to disclose any details about their deliberations.

While Kohrs did hold back, some former prosecutors found the interviews alarming. Meanwhile, Trump and his attorneys are using her comments to attack the investigation, and lawyers for several witnesses are preparing to try to quash indictments based on the forewoman’s interviews, CBS News reported.

In an interview with CNN, Elie Honig, a former federal and New Jersey state prosecutor, called Kohrs’ interviews a “prosecutor’s nightmare.”

“If and when there is an indictment, this will become a motion to dismiss, mark my words,” Honig tweeted Tuesday. “It may not succeed - it’s a high bar legally - but she is causing a needless headache for prosecutors, at a minimum.”

Renato Mariotti, also a former federal prosecutor, wrote on Twitter that even if motions to have cases dismissed fail, “I expect the foreperson’s comments to be used frequently by the defense, including at trial, to allege unfairness and bias.” He called Kohr’s interviews “a distraction that will burden the Fulton County DA’s office.”

In an op-ed for MSNBC, Barbara McQuade wrote that “as a former prosecutor, I am mortified that a grand juror is talking about it publicly.”

McQuade said she found some or Kohrs’ remarks “alarming.” For instance, the forewoman told the Atlanta Journal-Constitution she swore in one witness while holding a Ninja Turtle ice pop that she was given at the district attorney’s ice cream party.

“Why on Earth would grand jurors be socializing with the prosecutors?” McQuade wrote. “A grand jury is an independent body, and prosecutors are trained to maintain a professional distance and avoid engaging in interactions that could be perceived as influencing their decisions.

“A blabbing grand jury threatens to upend the whole enterprise,” McQuade added. “At some point, impropriety by a grand jury could be grounds for a claim of violation of the due process rights of the accused. And a successful claim could taint anything that occurred afterward, requiring dismissal of any indictments and a complete do-over.”

A week after falsely claiming the special grand jury’s report exonerated him, Trump, who is running for president again in 2024, on Wednesday used Kohrs’ interviews to attack the investigation, calling it “ridiculous” and “political.”

“This is not JUSTICE, this is an illegal Kangaroo Court,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.  

Lawyers representing Trump in Georgia told the Journal-Constitution that Kohrs’ comments undermined the credibility of the investigation, adding they were considering filing court motions in response. 

“This type of carnival, clown-like atmosphere that was portrayed over the course of the last 36 hours takes away from the complete sanctity and the integrity and, for that matter, the reliability” of the probe, attorney Drew Findling told the newspaper. 

The lawyers said Kohr’s ice pop story was proof that the investigation was unprofessional and overly chummy between jurors and prosecutors.

Attorney Jennifer Little argued that Kohrs crossed the line of discussing deliberations when she disclosed that grand jurors did not subpoena Trump because they didn’t think it would be productive, believing he would likely invoke his Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination. 

Findling said he thought Kohrs overstepped when she said the grand jury recommended multiple people be indicted because that was the result of deliberations.

However, McBurney, the judge, disagreed. He told the newspaper Wednesday that in his instructions to grand jurors about what they could discuss, he defined deliberations as conversations among themselves, not what was said when a prosecutor or witness was in the room. 

“That’s presentation,” he said. “And they’re not prohibited from talking about that, nor are they prohibited from talking about the fruit of their deliberations, which would be the final report.”

Willis’ office did not respond to an email from Spectrum News on Thursday seeking comment about Kohrs’ interviews and the Trump lawyers’ remarks.

While defense attorneys would likely try to use Kohrs’ media tour to sink a case, former prosecutors say they would be unlikely to succeed. 

Shan Wu, a former federal prosecutor, noted in an opinion piece for the Daily Beast that if Willis plans to pursue any charges recommended by Kohrs’ special grand jury, the DA would first have to impanel a regular grand jury and present evidence to it in order to secure an indictment.

“This offers insulation from any eventual charging decision,” Wu wrote. 

“So if Trump and his allies want to attack an indictment as being flawed because of Kohrs’ comments, then they will have to argue that the initial fact-finding and recommendations were all irrevocably tainted by Kohrs after the special grand jury had already completed its work,” he added. 

McQuade agreed that dismissing any indictments based on the Kohrs interviews is an “unlikely scenario,” and Mariotti tweeted that such motions would likely fail.