Big Trial | Philadelphia Trial Blog

By Ralph Cipriano
for BigTrial.net

On May 11, 2020, the Rev. Gregory Holston, a senior advisor on advocacy and policy to District Attorney Larry Krasner, got an email about time cards from the office's head of Human Resources.

In response, Holston, probably by mistake, hit the reply all button.

“Good morning," Holston wrote in an email sent to everyone in the office. "I’m coming up on my six month[s] with the district attorney’s office."

"I live in New Jersey and I’m supposed to move to Philadelphia by July," Holston wrote. "Because of the pandemic, I’ve been unable to search for a new home. Will I have additional time to move to Philadelphia? Rev.”

Yes, rest assured, Rev., you'll have plenty of time to move to Philadelphia. Because more than two years later, the Rev. Holston, who is paid $140,000 annually by D.A. Krasner, still lives in Sicklerville, N.J. in the house he bought back in 2003, in the community where he's registered to vote.

The Philadelphia City Charter requires all employees of the district attorney's office to live in Philadelphia; in the past, city employees have been fired for flouting the residency requirement. But apparently that clause in the city charter doesn't mean much to Rev. Holston, or his boss, D.A. Larry Krasner.

Holston is the second official in upper management in the D.A.'s office to be outed in less than a week by Big Trial for flagrantly flouting the city charter's residency requirement. The first was Nancy Winkelman, the supervisor of the D.A.'s law division, who twice listed on campaign finance reports last year a phony address in West Philadelphia, a rundown rental property with a coffin in front, when Winkelman really lives in a house on a scenic lake in Medford Lakes, N.J.

While Winkelman recently lectured a federal judge that "My integrity, my reputation, my candor, my ethics have never been questioned," the Rev. Holston can't make that same speech. Because like too many employees in D.A. Krasner's office, Holston has skeletons in his closet.

Greg Holston posing in his N.J. backyard

For starters, Holston, a graduate of Georgetown University who did not respond to a request for comment, is a disbarred lawyer.

After his legal career ended, Holston subsequently became a minister known for a bad Martin Luther King Jr. imitation, and blatant race-baiting against white people.

Holston also has a record of not paying his bills and not paying his taxes. And in 2016, he presided over the sale of three church buildings on behalf of the United Methodist Church of Philadelphia that were ultimately sold for a total of $865,000.

Before the sale went through, however, a valuable old pipe organ worth tens of thousands of dollars was stolen from one old church, causing a realtor to drop the church as a client. And, after the sales finally went through, church leaders and congregants were left to wonder where the proceeds went that were supposed to go to the United Methodist Church of Philadelphia.

Krasner's Roster of Lawbreakers

Sadly, in the D.A.'s office under Larry Krasner, Rev. Holston isn't an exception for bad behavior. When you're Larry Krasner, who didn't respond to a request for comment, you tend to surround yourself with people of questionable ethics, such as:

-- Krasner's former gun violence counselor who shot and killed a male prostitute that he arranged a tryst with during work hours.

-- A top Krasner advisor who got arrested for child abandonment after she left her four-year old daughter locked in a car.

-- An ADA who was accused by his former stripper girlfriend of breaking into her home and stealing porn that he had allegedly co-starred in.

-- A total of four top Krasner supervisors, and one former ADA who has since resigned, who were formally reprimanded by two different judges for a "lack of candor."

-- Five Krasner ADAs who signed a brief sent to Common Pleas Court Judge Scott DiClaudio that claimed Krasner didn't have a financial relationship with a couple of former law partners who were involved in a double murder case up on appeal.

Judge DiClaudio subsequently discovered that according to Krasner's own personal financial disclosure forms, the D.A. did receive income from his former law partners.

-- An ADA who was Krasner's former head of homicide who was demoted after a road rage incident where he was sued for false arrest.

Birds of a feather

-- Krasner's chief of community engagement who also has a habit of getting into road rage incidents where he allegedly pulled over an FBI agent, as well as a female cop on her way to work.

-- An alleged criminal justice reformer whom Krasner hired to train his young prosecutors who was subsequently accused of being a serial predator and rapist who was knowingly spreading STDS.

-- Finally, there's Krasner's former supervisor of the victim and witness services and restorative justice unit who was still on the job when Krasner's office decided to ignore an obvious conflict of interest and not prosecute her son for beating up his baby mama in broad daylight.

Movita Johnson-Harrell went on to become a state legislator who subsequently went to jail for stealing $500,000 from a nonprofit that she founded.

Nothing better illustrates Krasner's coziness with criminals than his continuing friendship with Johnson-Harrell. At a rally at City Hall in March of this year, Krasner, Holston and Police Officer Agnes Torres, a member of Krasner's security detail, were only too happy to fraternize and pose for pictures with Johnson-Harrell.

At the time, Johnson-Harrell was on probation after spending two months in prison for the three felonies she pleaded guilty to, which involved stealing money that was supposed to support the homeless, seniors, drug addicts, the mentally ill, and the disabled. But instead, Johnson-Harrell spent the money on fur coats, a trip to Mexico, payments on a Porsche as well as funding her political campaign for state representative.

Greg Holston's Checkered Past As A Lawyer

In 1993, the state Supreme Court of Pennsylvania disbarred Gregory Holston as a lawyer because he forged a judge's signature on a phony divorce decree, and when questioned about it by that judge, he lied.

According to an opinion issued by the state Supreme Court, in the case of Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Gregory Holston, Holston was hired in 1987 to represent Richard Wofford of Philadelphia in a divorce. But Holston's attempts to serve Wofford's wife with the divorce complaint through the Philadelphia sheriff's office resulted in a return of "not found."

According to the state Supreme Court opinion, Holston "did nothing else to serve the defendant or to locate her whereabouts." Some seven months later, when Wofford asked Holston how the case was coming along, Holston "assured him that things were proceeding and in early August, 1988, [Holston] informed his client that a divorce decree had been granted."

Holston mailed Wofford a divorce decree dated July 16, 1988 and signed by Common Pleas Court Judge Alex Bonavitacola, along with a certificate purporting to verify the accuracy of the decree.

But on Nov. 14, 1988, attorney Holston filed a motion to amend the complaint, and a petition for special service of the complaint through the U.S. Mail. In a hearing two weeks later, the judge looked at the complaint, and then asked Holston "to tell him where he had gotten it."

In response to this "direct question," according to the state Supreme Court opinion, Holston "lied and said that he did not know how he got the document and who prepared the order and certification."

In a subsequent meeting with an ethics lawyer, Samuel Stretton, Stretton advised Holston "that his conduct in this matter was improper and that he should reveal to Judge Bonavitacola that he was responsible for forging the name of the judge to the decree that he sent to Mr. Wofford."'

Holston "did so and, throughout these proceedings, he has admitted his wrongful conduct and shown his remorse for having forged a court order and lying to a court of law," the state Supreme Court opinion states.

Rather than be disbarred, Holston asked the state Supreme Court to publicly censure him. But Holston was disbarred, the state Supreme Court wrote, because his conduct "demonstrates a callous disregard for the very integrity of the judicial process and calls for the most severe sanction."

Holston's Suspect Career As A Minister

As a minister, Holston became the executive director of POWER Philadelphia, an interfaith justice advocacy organization. In that position, Holston was known for race-baiting.

In an Aug. 13, 2019 speech to Netroots Nation, Holston denounced "white privilege," and described the longstanding "unholy alliance" between the "white elite" and the "white working class." According to Holston, the "white elites promised poor white folks" that "I'll treat you just a little bit better than black folks."

And black people, Holston said, were treated as "less than human." According to Holston, the "promise that black people would be treated less than human . . . is still being kept." And that's why the country needs to pay reparations to black people, Holston said, plus an guaranteed annual income to all.

Greg Holston & Movita at a rally

Like his boss, Larry Krasner, who owes $80,888.26 in back taxes as of today, the Rev. Holston is also a tax deadbeat.

According to court records, Holston failed to pay $1,286.84 in water bills from 2004 to 2014 for a property at 2320 Morris Street. A judgment was issued for $2,686.48 on Sept. 30, 2019 consisting of a $1,400 fine plus the money owed.

Records show that between 2005 and 2012, Holston also failed to pay $6,917.56 in property taxes on 2320 Morris Street, which led to the house being seized and put up for a sheriff's sale.

Holston subsequently sued in Common Pleas Court, claiming that he was the victim of a forged deed, and the court returned the property to him within a year.

However, court records don't state whether Holston ever paid the back taxes. The property, which was sold on Feb. 9th, is currently in a payment agreement with the city to pay back taxes of $1,384, an agreement similar to the one that fellow tax deadbeat Larry Krasner has with the city.

City agencies, including the revenue department, require a Philadelphia address before they will issue a paycheck. That means for the past three years, in order to get paid, Holston would have had to provide the city with either the address on Morris Street, or another address within the city limits.

Where'd The Money Go?

In 2016, Holston oversaw the sale of three church buildings on behalf of the United Methodist Church of Philadelphia that were eventually sold for a total of $865,000.

They include the former New Vision United Methodist Church at 1217-23 North Hancock Street in Philadelphia, for $515,000; the Mount Carmel Methodist Episcopal Church at 5901-07 North Park Avenue, for $300,000; and a building at 5909 North Park Avenue adjacent to the Mount Carmel church, for $50,000.

In 2020, church officials discussed hiring an auditor to investigate what happened to the proceeds of the sales.

But in an email, Bishop Peggy Johnson, who oversaw nearly 1,000 churches in the United Methodist Church's Eastern Pennsylvania and Peninsula-Delaware Annual Conferences, wrote, "I retired last year before anything was ever resolved. I really don’t know anything further about this situation."

"Was any of the money ever turned over?" I wrote her back. "I was told it was all missing."

"Don’t know one way or the other," the retired bishop wrote back.

When Holston was appointed as a senior advisor to Larry Krasner in February of 2020, Jane Roh, Krasner's spokesperson, wrote that Holston "will advise DAO employees on ways to integrate social justice best practices and community-based policies and procedures into their work."

Johnson-Harrell with P.O. Agnes Torres

And externally, Roh wrote, Holston will "work to advance the mission of the DAO to make the criminal justice system more accessible and accountable, in order to build trust in law enforcement, the DAO, and the court system."

But apparently building trust in the DAO doesn't involve obeying the residency requirement in the city charter.

According to the charter, employees in exempt positions such as Holston must move to Philadelphia within six months of their appointment. Civil service employees are required to live in Philadelphia for one year prior to their appointment.

But that doesn't mean much to Larry Krasner, who presides over an office where law-breaking is not only tolerated, but is also widespread.

City officials who allegedly oversee the district attorney's office didn't have much to say about the continued flouting of the residency requirement.

A spokesperson for Mayor Kenney's office did not respond to a request for comment.

Alex DeSantis, the city's inspector general, referred questions to the district attorney's office, which isn't talking, and the city controller.

"I’m afraid that we are unable to address this issue as a matter of law," DeSantis wrote. "Although the OIG does investigate compliance with the City’s residency requirement for employees, our authority extends only to Executive Branch employees."

A spokesperson for city Controller Rebecca Rhynhart said she would share the information about Holston's New Jersey address with investigators in her office who oversee the residency requirement.

"There isn't much else I can say at this point," the spokesperson wrote in an email.

Larry Krasner Orders Detective To Evict Reporter

By Ralph Cipriano
for BigTrial.net

At a press conference today, I tried to ask District Attorney Larry Krasner a question.

Actually, I tried to ask him a question three different times.

The first time I spoke up, Krasner issued a stern warning.

"That is not how we proceed," Krasner admonished me. After four years of presiding over free-for-all press conferences, the D.A. now maintains that reporters no longer have the right to speak up and ask him a question. Instead, the D.A. says, like kindergarteners at show-and-tell, they have to be called on first before they can speak.

And the one reporter Krasner never calls on is me.

"Anyone who cannot observe those rules can leave and can leave now or be escorted out," the D.A. warned the press corps.

The second time today that I dared to ask the D.A. a question, Krasner gave me another warning. The next and last time I asked, Krasner hit the eject button.

"Sir, that is the third time," Krasner said, pointing his right index finger toward the exits. "Detective [Tom] Kolenkiewicz, will you please escort him out."

As the dictatorial Krasner looked on, Detective Kolenkiewicz grabbed my arm. And then the detective and another member of the D.A.'s security team, Police Officer Chad Jeter, plus a third security officer from the church where Krasner was holding his press conference, surrounded me and escorted me out of the building.

My crime: daring to ask the D.A. a question at a press conference.

A little background here. For three years, I wrote more than a hundred stories documenting the unprecedented incompetence and corruption of the District Attorney's office under "Let 'Em Loose" Larry Krasner. At a time when the city was and still is setting historic records for bloodshed in the form of murders, shootings and carjackings.

More than 60 of those stories are archived on my own website, ralphcipriano.com. If you check it out, you'll see that I frequently have the goods on Krasner.

Each time I wrote one of these stories, I would dutifully email Krasner and Jane Roh, his official spokesperson, and ask for comment.

And for more than a hundred straight times, Krasner and Roh stiffed me. They never responded to any of my questions.

So a month ago, I started attending Krasner's press conferences. And that's when Krasner started changing the rules of his press conferences, to no longer allow reporters to shout questions at him.

The first time I went, Krasner told the reporters that they could only ask him questions about community swimming pools, which on that day he was bravely speaking out in favor of.

If a reporter had a question about another subject, Krasner said, they had to dutifully line up in the hallway, like Catholics at Saturday night confession, to have a private one-on-one conference behind closed doors with the D.A.

When the D.A. got through answering all the other reporters' questions in those private sessions, he literally hustled out of the building rather than talk to me.

The second time I went to a Krasner press conference, he again said that he didn't want any one shouting questions at him. Krasner then stated he would take questions from the reporters starting from his right, and working all the way to his left.

I was on his extreme left. And when he got to me, Krasner abruptly ended the press conference and on the way out the door, he wouldn't answer any of my questions.

At the third press conference I attended, Krasner again insisted on calling on by name every other reporter the room, including a shy young intern at one of the local TV stations, so they could take turns lobbing him softballs, in English and Spanish.

And when they were finally done, the D.A. abruptly ended the press conference, and headed for the exits. He was protected by a couple of bodyguards who physically prevented your Big Trial correspondent from confronting him as he hustled out of the room.

At today's press conference, held at the Emmanuel Christian Center Inc. at 5913 Chestnut Street, Krasner was speaking out about the convictions of two gang members indicted by a grand jury for their roles in a series of shootings that occurred in 2018 and 2019, in the Overbrook and Mantua sections of the city.

One of those gang members was Xavier Veney, who was already sentenced by the feds on Jan. 13th of this year to 30 months in jail after he pleaded guilty to being a felon in illegal possession of a firearm.

Veney was accused by the grand jury in the gang wars of Overbrook and Mantua of the non-fatal shootings of a 19 year old and a 21 year-old, plus the nonfatal shooting of a 54 year-old innocent bystander.

On July 28th, Veney pleaded guilty to two charges of aggravated assault and one count of carrying unlicensed firearms. It was a negotiated plea bargain with the D.A.'s office that involved a prison sentence of 8 to 16 years, to be served concurrently with Veney's federal sentence.

So twice, I tried to ask Krasner about Veney's new sentence, which, when subtracted from his previous federal sentence, amounted to an extra five and a half years in prison for shooting three people!

To me, it seemed like a light sentence, especially compared with Krasner's tough talk at today's press conference about "people who are shooting other people."

According to Krasner, he wants to put those people "in fear that they're going to get caught."

"Make no mistake, we're coming for you," Krasner bragged. "We already know a lot more than you think. We're gonna get you. What ever you're doing; you better stop now."

So the first time I tried to ask Krasner about Veney's light sentence, he refused to answer.

Instead, he said, "I'm calling on Matt Petrillo" of CBS Philly. "Mr. Petrillo, do you have any questions?"

Petrillo, clearly a Krasner favorite among the press corps, proceeded to ask a series of innocuous questions about a shooting in Brewerytown.

"Mr. Petrillo, does that conclude your questions," the solicitous D.A. asked.

When it did, I took that opportunity to pipe up again to ask about Veney's light sentence.

But Krasner wasn't going to answer my question. Instead, he threatened me with eviction.

"Sir, that's your second warning," Krasner said. "You keep it up, you're gonna have to leave," he said, before calling on Kristen Johanson of KYW.

"You are not responding to my questions," I protested to Krasner. "What's my alternative? This is a press conference."

Johanson, much to Krasner's surprise, asked a series of tough questions that ended with asking Krasner if he was going to drop murder charges against former police officer Ryan Pownall.

"No," Krasner defiantly said.

Since Johanson had opened the door, I decided to ask Krasner about a blistering opinion from Kevin Dougherty, a state Supreme Court justice no less, who had accused Krasner of abusing the grand jury process in indicting Pownall for murder.

"What about Kevin Dougherty," I asked.

"I am asking you to leave," Krasner said. "You have three times violated the rules of how we do this. Please exit."

That's when I found myself surrounded by three security officers, two from the D.A.'s office, and one from the church.

The detective from the D.A.'s office accused me of breaking the rules of a press conference by repeatedly interrupting Krasner, and being disrespectful to our reform D.A.

I tried to explain to him that this was nonsense, that Krasner changed the rules for his press conferences every week, and that I had no choice but to interrupt him since he wouldn't call on me.

"I was 'respectful' for three weeks," I told the security guys, and it got me nowhere.

The security officer from the church advised me to leave voluntarily so the guys from the D.A.'s office "don't have to take you out physically."

While I was unsuccessfully arguing my case, Krasner was up at the podium telling the rest of the reporters, "I apologize for the fact that this press conference is being interrupted."

"I apologize for the fact that the legitimate media who are here to ask questions are being interrupted," he continued. "If you would just bear with me for a moment," he said, until the security officers guided me safely out of the building.

Outside the church's locked doors, I waited for Krasner. When he finally came out, I reminded him that he was formerly a civil rights lawyer, and that as D.A., he had just violated my civil rights by having me removed from a press conference. A press conference where I, as a reporter, had every First Amendment right to be there and ask him questions.

Krasner, of course, had his head down and didn't want to talk. Instead, he wanted to escape.

"What are you afraid of sir, what are you afraid of?" I asked as he drove off.

By Ralph Cipriano
for BigTrial.net

Back in 2000, when he was a ponytailed civil rights lawyer representing protesters at the Republican National Convention in Philadelphia, Larry Krasner claimed to be a champion of the First Amendment.

"The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution strictly protects free speech from preemptive suppression, because the loss of that illegally suppressed speech can never be restored," Krasner wrote in his 2021 book, For The People; A Story of Justice and Power.

In his book, Krasner recounted how upset he was when he heard that a judge who was a former cop was talking openly about a secret government plan to detain protesters until the Republican convention was over.

To make matters worse, Krasner wrote, "the police were giving off signs that they planned to crack down on free speech," which Krasner described as the protesters'"sacred" right.

But as District Attorney on Monday, Krasner that former champion of the First Amendment, ordered two police officers to preemptively suppress my right to free speech by evicting me under threat of force from a press conference that the D.A. held at the Emmanuel Christian Center in West Philly.

Why was I evicted? Because three times at that press conference, I tried to ask Krasner a question.

In behaving like a dictator, Krasner proved David Horowitz's maxim that "Inside every progressive is a totalitarian screaming to get out."

As he was leaving his press conference Monday, I asked Krasner about his past life as a civil rights lawyer, and how that squared with using the cops to preemptively suppress my right to free speech.

But once again, Krasner refused to talk to me as he got into his Ford, and his driver hit the gas pedal. A video of our confrontation is posted at the end of this story.

As district attorney, however, Krasner has not only violated my constitutional right to free speech, he has also blatantly trampled on the constitutional rights of police officers, as well as the rights of a criminal defendant who happened to be a former police officer.

Krasner's tyrannical actions were so outrageous that twice he has been formally admonished by state judges.

Krasner's 'Black List'

The first time was in November 2021, when the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania ruled that a "Do Not Call List" of allegedly tainted cops compiled by Krasner -- a list that would prohibit those cops from testifying in court as witnesses -- was unconstitutional.

The list, subsequently published in The Philadelphia Inquirer, amounted to a "black list," the court stated, because it did not afford the accused cops due process where they could contest the charges, and have a chance to clear their names.

The 34-page opinion of the Commonwealth Court, written by Judge Patricia McCullough, was issued in the 2019 case of the Fraternal Order of Police Lodge No. 5 vs. the city of Philadelphia, Mayor Jim Kenney, District Attorney Krasner, and former Police Commissioner Richard Ross.

In the opinion, the Commonwealth Court stated that in the FOP case, "a fundamental right is at stake, and the City and the District Attorney did not afford the appellant police officers the proper due process required under the Pennsylvania Constitution."

According to the court, "police officers should not be required to wait until damage to their reputations has been done before they are provided a meaningful opportunity to be heard."

According to the Commonwealth Court, the FOP had successfully contended that "police officers were not informed that they were placed on the Do Not Call List until after the fact, nor were they provided an opportunity to challenge their inclusion on the List prior to or after being placed on the List."

In the opinion, Judge McCullough stated that "the negative stigma of being included on a Do Not Call List is a threat to the appellant police officers’ reputations."

But Larry Krasner doesn't give a damn about that.

Krasner's Unconstitutional Abuse Of The Grand Jury

The second time Krasner was admonished by a judge for trampling on someone's constitutional rights happened last month. That's when State Supreme Court Justice Kevin Dougherty charged Krasner with abusing the grand jury process in his crusade to indict former Police Officer Ryan Pownall for murder in a racially charged officer-involved shooting case.

According to what Dougherty wrote in a concurring opinion, the D.A.'s office under Krasner was “driven by a win-at-all-cost office culture” that "treats police officers differently than other criminal defendants."

"This is the antithesis of what the law expects of a prosecutor," Dougherty wrote, adding that under the law, a prosecutor is supposed to be a "minister of justice."

In his concurring opinion, Justice Dougherty wrote that Krasner's office didn't inform the grand jury about the relevant case law involving justifiable use of force by a police officer.

A state statute says that a police officer is "justified in using deadly force only when he believes that such force is necessary to prevent death or serious bodily injury to himself or such other person."

The law goes on to say that the officer must believe "such force is necessary to prevent the arrest from being defeated by resistance or escape," or if the suspect "has committed or attempted a forcible felony or is attempting to escape and possesses a deadly weapon."

According to former Detective Derrick Jacobs, who investigated the Pownall shooting on behalf of the Philadelphia Police Department, that's exactly what happened in the Pownall case.

But Larry Krasner didn't give a damn about the facts of the case. Instead, he decided to create his own facts.

Krasner Tampers With The Law To Produce A Slanted Grand Jury Presentment

According to Justice Dougherty, because the grand jury wasn't informed about the applicable law involving justifiable use of force by a police officer, that's why the grand jury produced a "slanted" presentment that accused Pownall of murder. It was a grand jury presentment that subsequently served as a useful political tool for Larry Krasner.

"The DAO successfully moved to unseal it," Justice Dougherty wrote about the grand jury presentment. "And then, after charging Pownall, [the D.A.] directed the press to its purported factual findings."

"Not surprisingly, multiple news sources reported on the presentment’s one-sided account, with some even making the full document available online for anyone and everyone to read," Justice Dougherty wrote.

What the judge didn't say was that the media, led by The Philadelphia Inquirer, Krasner's official propagandists, did Krasner's dirty work for him by tarring and feathering Pownall as a racist killer who wore a badge.

But the grand jury had been fed a false narrative by Larry Krasner. Here's what actually happened.

On June 8, 2017, Officer Pownall was transporting Terrence Freeman, a witness, and his two children to the Special Victims Unit. Along the way, Pownall saw David Jones weaving in and out of traffic while driving recklessly on his dirt bike, which is illegal to operate on the streets of Philadelphia.

Pownall got out of his squad car and confronted Jones. When the cop frisked Jones, he discovered a gun in Jones' waistband. During a fight that ensued, the officer drew his gun and told Jones not to grab his weapon. Pownall tried to shoot Jones during the struggle, but his gun jammed. Jones then fled on foot and the officer fired three times, killing Jones.

In the view of former Detective Jacobs, Pownall did nothing wrong.

"Jones was armed," Jacobs previously told Big Trial. And during the fight between the two men, Jacobs said, "Pownall believed he was shooting Jones to protect himself and possibly Freeman and his children as well."

Did Krasner Tamper With Evidence?

Not only did Krasner fix the grand jury process by not informing the grand jurors of the relevant case law, but the D.A. may have also tampered with evidence.

According to knowledgable sources, surveillance video shows that after he shot Jones, Pownall was so convinced that Jones was armed that he is seen on the video turning Jones' body over as he frantically searches the ground for Jones's gun.

The grand jury transcript in the case does not describe how much of the surveillance video was shown to the jury. In the opinion of knowledgable sources, if the grand jurors saw the full video, they could not have possibly indicted Pownall for murder.

Tampering with the law in this case, and possibly tampering with the evidence as well, isn't the full extent of Krasner's unconstitutional actions regarding former Police Officer Pownall.

In September 2018, using a faulty grand jury presentment, Krasner indicted Pownall for first-degree murder, and he was held in prison without bail. Had a judge not reduced the charge to third-degree murder, and granted Pownall bail, the ex-cop would have been in prison for the past five years.

After he indicted Pownall, Krasner successfully petitioned the courts to deny Pownall a preliminary hearing, where he would have had a chance to hear the evidence against him, and confront his accusers.

And then, for the next five years, Krasner petitioned the courts unsuccessfully to have the state statue retroactively changed regarding permissible use of deadly force by a police officer, so that Pownall would have been denied a legal defense.

In his crusade to retroactively change the law, Krasner got all the way up to the state Supreme Court before it denied his appeal.

So after he lost his appeal in state Supreme Court, did Krasner finally dismiss his case against Pownall?

Hell no.

Krasner's next move was to seek a 90-day stay in the case so that he could mull over whether to file an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. Krasner's request, however, was denied.

But for the past five years, Krasner's actions in the case have effectively denied Pownall his Sixth Amendment right to a "speedy and public trial by an impartial jury," as well as the right "to be confronted with the witnesses against him."

For Larry Krasner, the turnaround has been complete.

For 30 years, Krasner was a civil rights lawyer who zealously advocated for the rights of protesters and accused criminals.

But as soon as he was elected as a supposedly progressive D.A., Krasner used his newfound powers to trample on the constitutional rights of people he despises, people he believes don't deserve to have constitutional rights.

David Horowitz called it.

As soon as he gained power, the screaming totalitarian inside Progressive Larry Krasner had to get out.

Before he evicted me, D.A. hid from Big Trial

By Ralph Cipriano
for BigTrial.net

Larry Kane was flabbergasted.

Kane, the dean of TV anchors in Philadelphia for nearly 40 years until his retirement in 2003, couldn't believe that District Attorney Larry Krasner had actually ordered a couple of police officers to evict me from a press conference.

Kane's now a 79 year-old semi-retired special contributor for KYW News Radio who was doing an editorial on my eviction. During our interview, I briefly turned the tables on the broadcast Hall-of-Famer and asked how he would describe what Krasner did.

"Unprecedented" was the only word Kane could think of. Not even the late Frank Rizzo, Kane said, had ever pulled a stunt like that.

A couple of lawyers I talked to about Krasner's eviction of a reporter from a press conference had another word to describe it -- unconstitutional.

"Krasner is engaging in unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination against you," wrote Mark Zecca, a former senior attorney in city of Philadelphia's Law Department.

The press conference held Monday at the Emmanuel Christian Center in West Philadelphia, Zecca wrote in an email, was an official government activity where Krasner presided over a "government forum for journalists."

"And [Krasner] made it crystal clear that every single journalist would have an opportunity to ask questions, except you," Zecca wrote in an email. "He made it clear that he was making himself available — to all except you."

On D.A.'s orders, detective evicts reporter

But a government official, Zecca wrote, can't discriminate on the basis of race, sex, or political affiliation. "Similarly," Zecca wrote, "there are Constitutional constraints on government as to viewpoint discrimination."

"So, it is perfectly obvious why he excluded you — your views," Zecca wrote. "As the reporter who has the most coverage of him and the most critical coverage, he did not want you to speak."

"But you have a Constitutional right to those views," Zecca wrote. "And [Krasner] has no right to dole out official governmental benefits in a way that specifically discriminates against someone because that person expresses their Constitutional freedoms to express views he disagrees with."

"And he carried the unconstitutional discrimination to the outrageous unconstitutional step of physical ejection and enlisted law enforcement with power of arrest into his unconstitutional actions," Zecca wrote.

First Amendment scholars historically agree with what Zecca had to say about viewpoint discrimination.

"Viewpoint discrimination is a form of content discrimination particularly disfavored by the courts," wrote Kevin Francis O'Neill and David L. Hudson Jr. in a 2017 online article for The First Amendment Encyclopedia, published by the Free Speech Center at Middle Tennessee State University.

"Because the government is essentially taking sides in a debate when it engages in viewpoint discrimination, the Supreme Court has held viewpoint-based restrictions to be especially offensive to the First Amendment," the authors wrote. "Such restrictions are treated as presumptively unconstitutional."

Besides our Philly D.A., another recent practitioner of viewpoint discrimination is former President Donald Trump.

In 2019, the 2nd and 4th Circuit Courts of Appeals ruled that Trump violated the First Amendment by removing from his Twitter account, “@realDonaldTrump," negative comments from critics who ripped him and his governmental policies.

In the Trump case, the appeals courts upheld a lower court ruling that Trump's Twitter account was a designated public forum, and that blocking critics constituted viewpoint discrimination.

Another lawyer who thinks what Krasner did is unconstitutional is Paula Knudsen Burke. She's a local legal initiative staff attorney based in Pennsylvania for the Reporters Committee For Freedom Of the Press, a Washington D.C.-based nonprofit that provides pro bono legal services and resources to journalists.

"Government officials cannot make media access decisions based on the content of news coverage," Burke wrote Krasner on Wednesday. "Such action would amount to unconstitutional content based restrictions on First Amendment activity. Simply put, a government official such as an elected District Attorney has a constitutional duty to remain content-neutral when dealing with the press."

Krasner, of course, because he thinks he was elected dictator, did not respond to Burke's letter. Neither did Jane Roh, Krasner's official spokesperson.

When he went on the air Thursday afternoon, Larry Kane still sounded flabbergasted about Krasner's behavior.

"This is a first," Kane said on KYW in a short one-minute segment that ran some 14 times between 3 p.m and 10 p.m. Thursday. "In my 56 years of reporting here I've never heard of a major public official personally ordering the removal of a journalist."

According to Kane, Krasner's "vitriolic tone is a first on the local political scene."

"Such luminaries as Ed Rendell, Mike Nutter, John Street would get angry at the media but never under threat of force order a reporter removed from the building," Kane said.

And not only did Larry Krasner and Jane Roh stiff Paula Knudsen Burke, they also stiffed Larry Kane.

"We're waiting for a response from Krasner's press chief," Kane said on the air, before signing off. "Larry Kane, KYW News Radio 103.9 FM."

So there you have it folks. In ordering the cops to evict me from a press conference, Progressive Larry Krasner the former civil rights lawyer stooped to a hardball tactic that Rendell, Nutter and Street, and even Frank Rizzo, never resorted to.

So Krasner could commit the same kind of unconstitutional offense -- viewpoint discrimination -- that the federal courts determined that Donald Trump was guilty of.

Topping Rizzo and emulating Trump is not good company for an alleged progressive, Larry.

But what the D.A. did on Monday isn't just a problem for me.

In an interview on Wednesday with talk show radio host Dom Giordano, I expressed my opinion that the rest of the media in this town was making a mistake by allowing Krasner to set a dangerous precedent.

"What they don't realize is it was my turn Monday, but the precedent's been set and next week it could be their turn," I told Giordano.

By Ralph Cipriano

for BigTrial.net

District Attorney Larry Krasner told The New York Times last week that only a "small fraction" of the people who were arrested and charged with illegally carrying guns were rearrested for allegedly committing violent crimes.

But crime stats tracked by Big Trial for the past four years show that more than 40% of the people who were originally arrested for gun crimes during two summer months in 2019 were rearrested and charged with new crimes that include nonfatal shootings, murders, rapes and carjackings.

To make matters worse, the NYT story was published three days after a press conference in Philadelphia, where the D.A. bragged to local reporters about how tough he'd been on two gang members who'd just been sentenced for a terrorizing wave of gang-related shootings back in 2018 and 2019.

But court records revealed that both gang members were part of Krasner's "small fraction" of illegal gun carriers who re-offended, after they had previously been arrested for gun crimes, and then let off by the D.A.'s office with light sentences.

And when the two gang members were arrested again and convicted for committing violent new crimes, the D.A.'s office under Krasner gave them generous plea bargains that were too good to be true, generous plea bargains that from a criminal's point of view were too good to turn down.

So much for Krasner's small fraction of illegal gun carriers who are rearrested for violent crimes, and so much for Krasner's claim that he was getting tough on gang members.

But as usual when he deals with gullible progressive media outlets, Krasner got away with both lies, with the exception of Big Trial. At the press conference here in Philadelphia, I twice attempted to question Krasner about a lenient sentence that one of those gang members received.

And Krasner's response was to order the police to forcibly and unconstitutionally evict me from the building, a flagrant violation of the First Amendment.

Let's start with Krasner claim about the allegedly low rate of recidivism among those arrested for illegally carrying guns.

In an interview with The New York Times, the newspaper attributed this claim to Krasner, a claim that he has made many times before:

Only a small fraction of the people who are arrested for carrying guns without permits are the ones actually driving the violence, Mr. Krasner said.

But a Big Trial survey of gun arrests made in July and August of 2019 shows that out of 472 defendants arrested for allegedly carrying illegal guns, a total of 193, or 40.9%, were rearrested for allegedly committing a total of 304 alleged new crimes that included 14 murders, 20 nonfatal shootings, 9 robberies/carjackings, 4 rapes, plus 90 new cases of allegedly carrying illegal guns.

That's no small percentage. Yet nobody at the NYT challenged Krasner, to see if he has any data to back up his claim. The rate of recidivism for people who get arrested for gun crimes is a stat that the D.A.'s own Public Data Dashboard doesn't keep, a conspicuous omission.

Because any accurate tracking of the recidivism rate for defendants arrested for illegally carrying guns would be problematic for Larry Krasner. Especially at a time when the Pennsylvania state legislature is threatening to impeach him.

The NYT Goes Soft On Soft-On-Crime Krasner

The headline on the NYT story last week was: "‘Everybody Is Armed’: As Shootings Soar, Philadelphia Is Awash in Guns."

The subhead: "More than 1,400 people have been shot this year in Philadelphia, hundreds of them fatally — a higher toll than in much larger New York or Los Angeles."

This is true. Philadelphia, a city of 1.58 million people, set an all-time record for murders last year, with 562 murders. As of last night, the city has 338 murders as of this year, a slight 1% increase over last year's historic murder rate.

By contrast, New York City, which has 8.38 million people, more than 5 times the population of Philadelphia, had, as of Aug. 7th, only 261 murders this year, an 8% decrease over last year.

Since Krasner has been D.A. the annual murder rate has jumped from 315 in 20177, the year before he was elected, to that all-time record last year of 562, a 78% increase. Similarly, non-fatal shootings have escalated under Krasner's tenure, from 1,028 in 2017, the year before he took office, to 1,846 last year, a 79% increase.

But if you read progressive news media outlets like the New York Times, they would all have you believe that the D.A.'s permissive policies have nothing to do with the contemporaneous shooting and murder rampage.

Here's how the NYT covered for Krasner last week:

Mr. Krasner, one of the most prominent progressive prosecutors in the country, has long argued that putting a major focus on the arrest and incarceration of people caught carrying firearms without a permit is not only ineffectual but counterproductive . . .

Only a small fraction of the people who are arrested for carrying guns without permits are the ones actually driving the violence, Mr. Krasner said . . .

“What is their theory — that rather than go vigorously after the people who actually shoot the gun,” Mr. Krasner asked, “that we should take 100 people and put them in jail, because one of them might shoot somebody?”

Here's my theory, Mr. D.A.

How about putting 100 people in jail who get caught carrying illegal guns for serious sentences recommended by the state legislature for gun crimes, rather than the generous plea bargains that Krasner routinely gives to everybody?

Because Big Trial's crime stats show that nearly 41 out of 100 defendants arrested for illegally carrying guns in 2019 used their newfound freedom to go out and commit more crimes, such as shooting, killing, raping and carjacking other people.

While Krasner continues to con the media about his woeful record on prosecuting crime, in Philadelphia, blood continues to be shed at historic rates. The city this year may set new all-time records, not only for murders, but also for nonfatal shootings, as well as carjackings.

But if you listen to Larry Krasner, none of the ongoing epidemic of violent crime is his fault. He routinely blames the police, judges, witnesses, drugs, poverty, the pandemic, and lousy public schools.

But Krasner never looks in the mirror, and the progressive media continues to let him get away with it.

Repeat Felons And Lenient Sentences

In Pennsylvania, the crime of illegally carrying a gun without a license is technically known as a Violation of the Uniform Firearms Act. It's also the law in Pennsylvania that convicted felons are legally barred from carrying a gun.

But that doesn't stop Philly felons from continuing to be armed and dangerous.

The stats from July and August of 2019 show that out of 201 felons arrested in Philadelphia for the crime of illegally carrying guns, a total of 89 of the felon defendants, or 44.2%, were arrested again for allegedly committing a total of 142 new crimes.

During the same period, a total out of 124 defendants who weren't felons yet were charged with carrying firearms without a license, and a total of 56, or 45.1%, were rearrested and charged with committing 93 new crimes.

Besides the high rate of recidivism, the prosecution of gun crimes in the D.A.'s office has another problem -- lenient sentences. In prosecuting gun crimes, it's the policy of the D.A.'s office under Larry Krasner to routinely give out sentences that are well below state sentencing guidelines.

According to those state guidelines, the maximum sentence on a VUFA charge that's a first-degree misdemeanor, such as carrying a firearm in public, is up to five years in jail.

For a third-degree felony such as carrying a firearm without a license, it's up to seven years in jail.

And for a first-degree felony, which usually involves using a gun in the commission of a shooting, kidnaping, attempted murder, rape, robbery or carjacking, the maximum penalty is up to 20 years in jail.

But that's not the kind of sentences that D.A. Krasner negotiates, and that judges are imposing.

According to court records, only 41 of the 176 defendants who were arrested in July and August of 2019 who were subsequently convicted, or 23% got sentenced to a state prison for at least one year.

And only five of those 41 state sentences, or 12%, were sentences that fell within the state legislature's recommended sentencing guidelines.

A Career Criminal Goes On A New Crime Spree

And, court records show, on the rare occasion when the D.A.'s office prosecutes a gun offender and gives him a state sentence, Krasner's office staffed with largely rookie prosecutors is so inexperienced and/or incompetent that many a dangerous offender will wind up back out on the street, to commit more crimes.

Such as Lamar Beatty, 55, of West Philadelphia, a career criminal who was arrested on June 4, 2019, and charged with violating a court order and possession of drugs, but all of those charges were subsequently withdrawn by the D.A.'s office.

Beatty previously had done time for burglary, forgery, gunpoint robbery, criminal conspiracy, retaliation against a witness, drugs, assault, false reporting of a crime, and theft.

On July 4, 2019, the cops arrested Beatty again and charged him with being a felon in illegal possession of a gun, plus simple assault, and possession of an instrument of crime.

But just two months later, on Sept. 10, 2019, Beatty was released on unsecured bail, meaning he didn't have to part with a dollar to get out of jail.

While out on bail, Beatty went on a new crime spree. Over the course of a year, starting on July 19, 2202, Beatty was arrested on two cases that included burglarizing a home and committing a robbery inside, and burglarizing a home and committing a rape inside.

On June 28, 2021, he was arrested again for another rape.

Here we have a career criminal with open gun charges against him who is rearrested rearrested three times and charged with serious crimes of violence involving two burglaries and two rapes.

Lamar Beatty is the exact kind of habitual violent offender that Krasner claims his office wants to concentrate on prosecuting, to reduce gun violence. So what did the D.A.'s office do with this career criminal?

On Aug. 5, 2021, Beatty pleaded guilty to the three original charges from 2019 -- being a felon caught illegally carrying a gun, assault, and possession of an instrument of crime.

But the D.A.'s office withdrew the two new charges filed against him in 2020, for robbery, burglary and rape; the D.A.'s office also dropped the charges in the 2021 case against Beatty involving another alleged rape.

By failing to prosecute Beatty on his 2019 gun crime and related charges, the D.A.'s office failed to protect the public. Court records show that for two years the D.A.'s office did absolutely nothing to prosecute Beatty until his new crime spree was over.

He was sentenced on the original charges from 2019, of being a felon in illegal possession of a gun, plus simple assault, and possession of an instrument of crime, to just 6 to 12 years in jail, and he didn't go there until March 3rd of this year.

If you're keeping score at home, that's five cases in two years, and the D.A.'s office only was able to successfully prosecute Beatty one time.

Here's another example of another lenient sentence from Krasner's office.

On June 15, 2019, Jailee Lee was arrested and charged with a gunpoint robbery and a burglary.On July 12, 2019, he was arrested for a total of three carjackings.

On Feb. 25, 2020, in a negotiated plea bargain deal with the D.A.'s office under Larry Krasner, the sentence Beatty received for all five crimes that he pleaded guilty to amounted to just 5 to 10 years in jail, with all the sentences running concurrently.

That's a sentence that amounts to just one year per crime.

Rappin' Larry Goes Off On Gang Members

Krasner called a press conference last week to brag about how tough he was on prosecuting gun crimes committed by two members of a street gang known as "02da4."

"02da4. Today, we want to send a very clear message to the members of 02da4," Krasner began.

"You like that name? How about go to da jail?," Krasner said. "Because that is where you're gonna go. And I don't just mean the two people we're here to talk about today."

"Members of 02da4 who are causing mayhem on our streets, who are terrifying the population, get ready 02da4, to go to da jail," Krasner continued. "Because that is what's going to happen. That is what justice looks like, and that is what you deserve."

Then Rappin' Larry called out the names of other local street gangs that included the pit boys, the brickyard mafia and the topsiders.

"Time is up where you gonna go to da jail," Rappin' Larry said. "If you illegally carry a firearm. If you point firearms at other humans and you pull the trigger, expect to be held accountable. And you will be held accountable the same wayXavier Veney and Sabir Scott are being held accountable for their role in a number of shootings in West Philadelphia."

"Make no mistake, 02da4, we're coming for you," Krasner bragged. "We already know a lot more than you think. We're gonna get you. What ever you're doing; you better stop and you better stop now."

What Really Happened With Xavier Veney

Xavier Veney is yet another member of that "small faction" of people that get arrested for illegally carrying guns who go out and get arrested for allegedly committing violent crimes.

Veney, 23, of West Philadelphia, was arrested on July 31, 2019, for carrying firearms without a license and carrying firearms in public.

Just a month earlier, on June 21, 2019, Veney had been arrested for -- you guessed it -- carrying firearms without a license, and carrying firearms in public.

On Aug. 1, 2019, after his second arrest for gun crimes, his bail was set at $25,000. But on Sept. 10, Veney's lawyer made a successful motion to reduce bail to $5,000, and Veney posted $500, or 10 percent, and got out of jail.

Just a week later, on Sept. 17, 2019, Veney entered into a negotiated guilty plea with the D.A.'s office that called for a concurrent sentence for both sets of gun charges that ran a total of 11 1/2 to 23 months in jail, plus 5 years probation.

It was quite a deal for Veney considering the state guidelines for just one of his crimes, carrying firearms without a license, a third-degree felony, calls for up to seven years in jail.

But Veney only served up to eight months in jail, because under the deal he cut with the D.A.'s office, he got out on immediate parole.

And what did Xavier Veney do when he got out of jail? He went right back to his life of crime.

On May 13, 2020, the cops arrested Veney a third time. This time the cops charged Veney with carrying firearms without a license, intentional possession of a controlled substance, possession of marijuana, and carrying a firearm during an emergency.

Xavier Veney had three VUFA arrests between June 2019 and May 2020 when on Oct. 7, 2021, he was arrested again and charged with two attempted murders, one in 2018, and one in 2019.

In the gang wars, Veney was charged with shooting a 19 year old and a 21 year-old, plus a third shooting, of a 54 year-old who was an innocent bystander.

On top of those charges, the feds had already convicted Veney in a separate case on another gun charge, and sentenced him to 30 months in jail.

So what did the D.A.'s office do with Veney?

On July 28th, Veney pleaded guilty in the gang wars to two charges of aggravated assault and one count of carrying unlicensed firearms. It was a negotiated plea bargain with the D.A.'s office that involved a prison sentence of 8 to 16 years, to be served concurrently with Veney's federal sentence.

So that meant that Veney's new sentence, when subtracted from his previous federal sentence, amounted to just an extra five and a half years in prison for shooting three people!

Contrary to what Larry Krasner had to say at his press conference about getting tough with gang members, the real message the rappin' D.A. sent out is that the cost of shooting rival gang members and innocent bystanders is negligible.

Veney will be back on the street in five years.

What Happened To Sabir Scott

Sabir Scott, 26, of the Juniata section of the city, is another member of D.A. Krasner's "small fraction" of people caught illegally carrying a gun who go out and commit another violent crime.

In 2015, Scott was sentenced to 9 to 23 months in jail after he pleaded guilty to receiving stolen property and conspiracy, plus two years probation.

On Sept. 16, 2018, while on probation, Scott was arrested and charged with three gun charges. But two months later, on Nov. 16, 2018, all three charges were dismissed.

On Aug. 25, 2020, Scott was arrested and charged with carrying firearms without a license and possession of a prohibited firearm. On July 25th of this year he pleaded guilty to both charges and was sentenced to 5 and half years to 11 years.

That sentence was to be served concurrently with Scott's sentence for shooting the 54 year-old innocent bystander in the gang wars. Scott pleaded guilty to conspiracy, and the two gun charges.

Like Veney, Scott was originally charged with attempted murder for trying to kill rival gang members, but was allowed to plead guilty to the lesser charge of aggravated assault.

According to court records, on Aug. 25, 2020, Scott began serving his two concurrent sentences on the gun charges, as well as the charges of shooting the innocent bystander.

He should be out shortly after the next election for D.A.

No wonder Larry Krasner threw me out of a press conference after I tried to question him about the supposedly tough sentences the D.A. had imposed on the two gang members.

Because the real facts of those cases would have shown that Krasner was lying.

But since the media hasn't exposed Krasner for the lying fraud that he is, the D.A. is free to escape accountability while he keeps playing politics. And that's what he continues to do.

In the August issue newsletter of the D.A.'s office newsletter, The Justice Journal, Krasner editorialized about former president Trump and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis.

But he could have been talking about himself.

"Authoritarians crave power without accountability and will stop at nothing in their quest to dominate and rule over people," Krasner wrote. "They will try to remove defenders of democracy through executive authority; they will use every possible weapon in service of their agenda, including violence."

By Ralph Cipriano
for BigTrial.net

The district attorney of Philadelphia today fled a press conference again on foot rather than take questions from this reporter.

Before he turned tail and ran, Larry Krasner announced to a sparse group of reporters the ground rules for his weekly press conference.

"Alright, as always we are going to proceed by way of calling on journalists who are in this room and seeing if they have questions," the D.A. announced, before warning, "If there are any outbursts, we're not going to tolerate that."

"First, we have John from Action News Six," the D.A. began. "Do you have anything, sir?"

But John from Action News got an urgent call on his cell phone and had to race out of the room. So he didn't have any questions for the obsequious D.A., who apologized for interrupting John's call.

Next, a visibly rattled-looking Krasner called on "Jack from NBC 10." But much to the D.A.'s dismay, Jack didn't have any questions. Neither did "Tina from Fox 29."

"I've got questions," I volunteered. But Krasner had no intention of answering any of them.

"Hold on, sir," the D.A. said, before he took three straight questions from Tom MacDonald from WHYY. Then, the D.A. suddenly realized that there was only reporter left in the room that he hadn't called on.

"I've got a question," I reminded Krasner.

But more than a month ahead of rabbit season in Pennsylvania, Larry Krasner stood up on his hind legs. His nose was twitching, his slender ears were erect. While he was sniffing the air, Krasner instinctively sensed danger.

The media wasn't going to throw him any softball questions; the only thing left for Krasner to deal with were some hardballs from Big Trial. So for the fourth time in six weeks, Larry Krasner, a grown man who's allegedly the top law enforcement official in Philadelphia, had to flee his own press conference rather than face tough questions from a reporter.

"All right, thank you very much, it's been a pleasure to see you and we'll see you again," Krasner said before gathering his papers and heading out the door, with your humble Big Trial correspondent in pursuit.

When you're a public official presiding over an official government function, such as a press conference, you're not allowed to discriminate on the basis of race, sex, or political affiliation.

Similarly, the courts all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court have held that a government official isn't allowed to discriminate on the basis of viewpoint. For example, if you're the alleged reform D.A. in Philadelphia, you're not allowed to stiff a reporter just because he may view you as a lying fraud, as frequently documented on this blog.

As he scampered toward an office door, I reminded Krasner that by once again calling on every other reporter in the room except me, he was practicing viewpoint discrimination. And viewpoint discrimination has repeatedly been found by the courts to be a blatant unconstitutional violation of the First Amendment.

For example in 2019, two federal appeal courts ruled that due to viewpoint discrimination, President Trump wasn't allowed to scrub negative comments off his Twitter account, “@realDonaldTrump."

But in the past two months, Krasner, a former civil rights lawyer, has shown he will go to any lengths, whether it's relying on deaf ears or fast-shuffling legs, to escape the one reporter in town who's got his number. Because when it comes to the facts that show he's done a horrible job as D.A., Krasner has no defense.

When he's confronted with the truth, Krasner's first instinct is to stonewall. His second instinct is to run.

And that's the extent of the two-page Krasner playbook. What the D.A. is always counting on is for the rest of the docile Philadelphia media to cover for him. And so far, he's gotten away with it.

Round One With Larry Krasner

I've been trying to get a straight answer out of our crooked D.A. for some time.

Every week, when I would write about the corruption and dysfunction in the D.A.'s office, I would email Larry Krasner at his two official email addresses, larry.krasner@phila.gov, and lawrence.krasner@phila.gov.

And every week, Krasner would stiff me. He never responded to any of my questions. Another hardcore stonewaller was Jane Roh, [jane.roh@phila.gov], Krasner's official spokesperson.

This stonewall campaign from Krasner and Roh lasted for three years. On July 11th, I decided to take a new approach. I decided to attend one of Krasner's weekly press conferences, typically held at 11 a.m. on Mondays.

My problems started when I attempted to enter the press conference and Police Officer Agnes Torres of Krasner's security detail promptly informed me that the event the D.A. was holding was a "private press conference," and that I wasn't allowed in.

Initially, Officer Torres locked me out of the press conference. But after she had to let so many others in, she finally left her post, as well as the door unlocked. So I wandered in, hoping to shout out some questions out at the weekly Q and A, when Krasner took questions from the media.

For years, Krasner entertained questions from reporters who had to raise their voices to get his attention. But on July 11th, with Big Trial in attendance for the first time, Krasner decided to change the format. He announced to the media that he would only take questions about community swimming pools, a civic cause that he was boosting at his press conference.

Anybody who had a question about any other topic was told to line up in the hallway for a private confab with the D.A. behind closed doors. When he got through taking questions from every other reporter, rather than talk to me, Krasner and his security detail hustled out of the building.

Round Two With Larry K

On Monday July 18th, Krasner again changed the format for his weekly Q and A with the media.

"Instead of our usual scrum, and I say that respectfully, I think there are occasions where some journalists who are the most aggressive get most of the attention," Krasner said. "That doesn't seem fair to me."

"I'm just gonna go down the line and see if there are any questions from the journalists who are here."

"What about Derrick Jones?" I interrupted.

I was asking about the 21-year-old suspect that police said got on SEPTA buses and trains and randomly hunted down and executed three passengers. I wanted to know why Jones wasn't in jail, rather than out on a killing spree.

The answer had a lot to do with "Let 'Em Loose Larry."

Jones, a repeat offender on probation who was facing a minimum sentence of three to six years in jail after he was arrested on gun charges, wound up serving only 11 1/2 months in jail, court records show, before he was released on house arrest.

And then Jones, according to the police, used his newfound freedom to ride SEPTA buses and hunt down and execute three other passengers.

So I wanted to know why Krasner gave Jones a lenient sentence. But Krasner didn't want to answer that quesiton.

"Excuse me sir," Krasner said. "As I said, we're not gonna have a scrum. We're gonna start over here. Mr. Dean?" he said, before taking several questions from Mensah Dean of The Philadelphia Inquirer.

After Dean was through, I tried again.

"Derrick Jones," I said to Krasner. "Why did you give him a sweetheart deal?"

That's when the Philly D.A. decided to get tough and actually threaten me in front of a roomful of reporters.

"Sir, sir, please," Krasner said. "Mr. Cipriano, if you're gonna disturb the proceedings, we're gonna have to do something about it."

When he began the Q and A, starting on his right, Krasner took questions from every other reporter in the building. When he got to me, positioned on his extreme left, he abruptly ended the press conference.

Round Three With Larry K

At his July 25th press conference, Krasner called on every other reporter in the room by name, including a shy young intern at one of the local TV stations, so they could take turns lobbing him softballs in English and Spanish.

Round Four -- Three Strikes And You're Out

On Aug. 8th, I tried a new tact. When he opened his Q and A, instead of waiting for him to call on another reporter, I decided to interrupt Krasner with a question.

I tried this three times. And on the third time, Krasner ordered two cops who were part of his security detail to evict me from the building.

"Sir, that is the third time," Krasner said, pointing his right index finger toward the exits. "Detective [Tom] Kolenkiewicz, will you please escort him out."

"I am asking you to leave," Krasner said. "You have three times violated the rules of how we do this. Please exit."

Krasner Plays Hide And Seek

On Monday Aug. 15th, Krasner didn't notify reporters by email about his Monday morning press conference as he customarily does. And then, at 11:44 p.m., Krasner put out a notice on his Facebook page that 16 minutes later, he would be holding a press conference at noon at his office.

"In person attendees are asked not to disturb journalists and other participants or the orderly process of a press availability," the press release stated.

Because of the short notice, I was unable to attend. So Krasner finally succeeded in staging a press conference without me.

Krasner Changes The Rules Again

On Aug. 17, after a mass shooting at the Shepard Recreation Center, Krasner moderated a joint press conference with the mayor, the police commissioner, and several other officials, an event live-streamed on Facebook.

At the joint press conference which I did not attend, Krasner told the media that the "orderly process of a press availability" was out the window.

"I'm simply going to facilitate questions for members of the media," Krasner announced. "If you have questions for a particular person who is up here please call out that person."

Round Five -- Today's Press Conference Ends With A Scamper

Today, Krasner called a press conference to announce the sentencing of Kevin Walker, a career criminal who's previously been convicted seven times, including four times for illegally carrying guns.

The fifth time came after cops saw Walker passing a firearm back and forth with a pal outside a steak shop on Germantown Avenue.

When he cops arrested Walker, 29, of North Philly on Oct. 4, 2020, he had in his possession 117 containers of crack cocaine as well as a 40 caliber Glock handgun with 13 live rounds plus an extended magazine with 19 more live rounds.

Walker entered an open guilty plea to possession of drugs with intent to deliver, and three gun charges. An open guilty plea means that the judge is free to pass sentence on the prisoner. And Judge Roxanne Covington promptly sentenced Walker to 9 to 18 years in prison.

The reason Krasner touted this otherwise routine case at a press conference was because of the unusually stiff sentence the judge gave Walker, so that Krasner could talk about how tough he was on crime.

"Kevin Walker is the poster guy for somebody who needs to be locked up because he presents an ongoing danger to the community," Krasner stated.

But two more arrests from the same week that Walker was arrested showed more typical sentences that are handed out to career criminals during Larry Krasner's tenure as D.A.

For example, Isaul Robles, 42, of New Providence, PA, had five prior convictions for guns and drugs.

He was arrested on Oct. 8, 2020, and entered a guilty plea on possession of drugs with intent to deliver, illegal possession of a firearm, and conspiracy. And his sentence was just 11 1/2 to 23 months in prison.

On April 1, 2021, Robles was arrested again for involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, a charge that in a negotiated plea bargain was reduced to unlawful contact with a minor and indecent assault. And his sentence was just 1 1/2 to 3 years in jail plus four years probation.

Another career criminal was Michael Lephart, 42, of Northeast Pennsylvania, who had nine prior convictions for gun charges, drugs, and robbery.

He was arrested on Oct. 5, 2020 and pleaded guilty to four gun charges. His sentence -- a paltry 11 1/2 to 23 months in jail plus five years probation.

But Krasner wasn't going to call a press conference to announce those kind of lenient sentences. Instead, he was going to cherry-pick the Walker case that featured a tough sentence from a judge on a guilty plea, so that Krasner could pretend he was tough on crime.

And when it came time to take questions from anybody who might question that narrative, like a scared rabbit, Krasner chose to run and hide.

By Ralph Cipriano
for BigTrial.net

Robert Listenbee, Larry Krasner's First Assistant District Attorney for the past past five years, is legally required by the City Charter to live in Philadelphia.

But for the past 25 years, Listenbee and his wife, Sabrina, have lived in a single-family, two-bedroom home in Glenside that the couple bought in 1997.

To get around the residency requirement, Listenbee, 74, who, as Krasner's top supervisor, is paid $187,171, has used as his address a one-bedroom apartment that he rents at 7720 Stenton Avenue in East Mount Airy where his daughter lives.

Listenbee is registered to vote in East Mount Airy. So when he voted for Joe Biden for president in November 2020, and for his boss in the election for D.A. last November, as confirmed by the Board of Elections, Listenbee very likely committed voter fraud.

The first district attorney's flouting of the residency requirement is not exactly a big secret. A colleague said that Listenbee openly admitted to him that he doesn't live in Philadelphia. Earlier this month, Listenbee's wife posted photos on Facebook that showed she and her husband biking near their home in Glenside, as well as a photo of a man removing a dead snake from their suburban yard.

Listenbee, however, did not respond to requests for comment. Neither did his boss, Stonewall Larry Krasner, who's been ignoring questions from this blog for the past three years.

Listenbee is the third high-ranking supervisor in the D.A.'s office who earn a total of more than $500,000 annually to be publicly outed by Big Trial in the past five weeks for violating the City Charter's residency requirement.

The first was Nancy Winkelman, who's paid $176,171 as the supervisor of the D.A.'s law division. This self-proclaimed woman of integrity twice claimed on campaign finance reports last year that she lived in a rundown rental property with a coffin in front at 650 S. 51st Street in West Philadelphia. But where she really lives is in a house on a scenic lake in rural Medford Lakes, N.J. where she's also registered to vote.

The third high-ranking carpetbagger in Krasner's office to be outed by Big Trial was the Rev. Gregory Holston, the D.A.'s senior advisor on advocacy and policy who is paid $140,000. Holston, a disbarred lawyer, still lives in Sicklerville, N.J. in the house that he bought back in 2003, where he's also registered to vote.

Of the trio of carpetbaggers in the D.A.'s office, only Listenbee is registered to vote at an address where he doesn't live.

What Robert Listenbee's address is depends on who's asking the question.

On his Statement of Financial Interests filed with the city and state, Listenbee listed as an address Three South Penn Square, the office of the district attorney.

When he donated $100 to Joe Biden's presidential campaign in November 2020, Listenbee listed on a campaign finance report his Glenside address. And twice in 2021, when he made two donations of $1,000 each to Larry Krasner's reelection campaign, Listenbee again listed on two campaign finance reports his Glenside address.

But during a court deposition last year, Listenbee gave as his address 7720 C Stenton Avenue,

Apt. 304, Philadelphia, PA 19118.

On the weekend of April 24, 2021, a private investigator stopped by Listenbee's apartment on Stenton Avenue, to see who lived there.

Sarah Listenbee, Listenbee’s daughter, answered the door. She said that she and boyfriend lived at the apartment. When asked about her father, she stated that Robert Listenbee did not live there. Then, she changed that story to say that her father did live there, but that he had just gone to the store.

Listenbee was the former administrator of the U.S. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. His status as a former Barack Obama appointee is something that his boss, Larry Krasner, likes to brag about.

At a July 25th press conference, Krasner was asked a question about a straw purchaser who had allegedly bought guns for juveniles.

Before he would divulge any information about the juvenile defendants, however, Krasner told reporters that he'd "better make sure I'm not on the wrong side of this." Then, Krasner left the podium to confer privately with Listenbee, who was standing behind the D.A.

The brief conference ended with Listenbee shaking his head.

"I cannot answer that based on the juvenile act at this time," Krasner said when he returned to the podium. "And I'm only talking to the guy who ran juvenile justice for Barack Obama, so he's got a little bit of an idea what it says. You may have seen him shaking his head."

As a federal appointee, however, Listenbee wasn't universally acclaimed.

On Jan. 26, 2015, Marilyn Moses, president of Local 2830 of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), the union representing the federal employees who worked for Listenbee, openly called for his resignation.

In an interview with a website called the Juvenile Justice Information Exchange, Moses said that under Listenbee, the agency had “spiraled out of control” and that staff morale had plummeted.

“I just don’t see how Mr. Listenbee can legitimately lead [the agency] forward through the crisis that his employees are currently facing,” Moses said. Union members had "high hopes" for Listenbee when he took over, Moses said, but she added, “Now they have been bitterly disappointed.”

“There’s a total disconnect in his communications style with employees,” Moses said.

Listenbee came to the federal agency with a reputation as a juvenile justice reformer. In 2011, the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation honored him with a Champion for Change award for his leadership in reforming the juvenile justice system in Pennsylvania.

Before taking over the federal juvenile justice agency, Listenbee served for 27 years as a public defender in Philadelphia, including 16 years as chief of the public defender's juvenile unit.

But no matter what job he had, Listenbee and his wife continued to maintain their home in Glenside.

On July 31st, Listenbee's wife posted on Facebook a photo of her and her husband riding their bikes near their Glenside home.

On Aug. 5th, Sabrina Listenbee posted another photo on Facebook of a young man whom she said was kind enough to remove a dead garter snake from her suburban yard, when she was too "chicken" to do it.

Since Listenbee is the third high-ranking supervisor at the top of the office pay scale to be outed for living outside the city, it's reasonable to ask whether the boss gave his supervisors a pass on the residency requirement. But the boss ain't talking.

When asked specifically about that issue, Krasner did not respond to a request for comment.

Since Big Trial outed Winkelman, some young assistant district attorneys have expressed anger and resentment about having to live in Philadelphia while top supervisors in Krasner's office can flout the residency requirement.

It's an obvious double standard, but apparently Krasner the alleged reformer of the criminal justice system just doesn't care about glaring inequalities and rank favoritism in his own office.

And over at City Hall, other progressive elected officials are afraid to criticize the progressive D.A. who doesn't think his staff has to follow the law.

Regarding the flouting of the residency requirement in the D.A.'s office under Krasner, both a spokesperson for the mayor's office and a spokesperson for the city controller did not respond to requests for comment.

Another top Krasner supervisor pictured in the photo above from last year's PBS series Philly D.A. is Patricia Cummings, the former head of Krasner's Conviction Integrity Unit who quietly resigned last August.

According to several sources, during the pandemic, when staffers could work from home, Cummings, who grew up in El Paso, returned to her native Texas to live there for a couple of years while she was still on the payroll of the Philadelphia District Attorney's office. That's how loose the residency requirement is in the D.A.'s office under Larry Krasner.

I tried to reach Cummings for comment on this topic. She's now the executive director of the National Registry of Exonerations.

In an email this past Sunday, Maurice Possley, a spokesperson for the National Registry, wrote back: "Ralph, I got your email. I also see that you emailed through the Registry portal. Everyone at the Registry, including Patricia, sees those emails. So she is aware."

She may be aware, but for five straight days now, Cummings has refused to talk.

Like other high-ranking supervisors in Krasner's office, when it comes to the residency requirement, apparently it's a matter handled with a wink and a nod.

Because when you're a high-paid supervisor working for Larry Krasner, apparently he's too busy leading the revolution to reform the criminal justice system in Philadelphia to worry about what the city charter has to say.

Historically, at City Hall, if you were caught living outside of the city it was a fireable offense.

But over at the D.A.'s office, where Larry Krasner picks and chooses which laws he cares to enforce, Winkleman, Holston and Listenbee continue to get a pass on living outside the city.

By Ralph Cipriano
for BigTrial.net

It was back in the dying days of newspaper journalism, when the editors were trying to shake things up by experimenting with different points of view.

Thirty years ago, to the shock of my colleagues, as well as myself, I was named the religion reporter at The Philadelphia Inquirer.

In our left-wing liberal newsroom, I got the assignment because I didn't believe in God, didn't go to church and had never read a page of the Bible, or any other sacred or religious text, because the topic of religion bored me.

I was at the Inquirer, after all, the place where the editors used to say, when everybody zigs, we zag. At the time the editors, facing declining circulation rates and plunging ad revenues, were tinkering by doing thinks like, say, sending a feature writer down to a train station, to write about the rats that come out at night, or dispatching a female reporter to storm a men's locker room.

I was to be another journalistic experiment; the guy with no faith writing about people who had it, the guy who believed in nothing writing about people who believed in just about everything.

My boss, Robert J. Rosenthal, then the Inquirer's city editor, was a secular Jew who told me, a fallen Catholic, that he shared my skepticism about organized religion. And that's why he thought I would be the perfect guy to shake up the paper's typically dull and boring religion beat.

I thought my boss was crazy. And that if I wrote what I really thought about religion and religious people, there might be some serious pushback in a town that was heavily Catholic.

“You’re going to get both of us fired,” I said.

That premonition, as I have previously written, turned out to be true. My appointment as religion writer led to a historic lawsuit that involved a reporter suing his own editor for libel, the Catholic archbishop of Philadelphia, and a story I wrote that really pissed him off.

But that's not the subject of today's post.

Thirty years ago this month, I decided I had to cover the opening of the largest house of worship in Philadelphia -- Deliverance Evangelistic Church in North Philadelphia.

The place was a brand new $15 million palace that seated 5,140, and was built on the site of the old Connie Mack Stadium. And I was eager to meet the man who had made it all possible.

Two months earlier, I had covered the June 1992 Billy Graham crusade in Philadelphia that was surprisingly sponsored by mainly minority urban churches. That's where I learned that Benjamin Smith Sr. was a legend among the pastors of Philadelphia, whether they were black, white or Latino.

Pastor Smith was known among his colleagues as the pastor’s pastor. Other ministers told me with awe in their voices that Ben Smith could quote more than 170 Bible passages from memory.

The pastor had founded his nondenominational church in a friend’s living room in 1961, with just ten members. Thirty years later, the church had grown to 10,500 active members, the largest congregation in the city.

But Pastor Smith didn’t just care for the spiritual needs of his parishioners. He and his congregation had built a gymnasium and a day care center at the church. And next store to the church, at a time when developers weren't exactly lining up to move into North Philly, the church built a shopping center with a McDonald’s, a Payless shoe store and a Thriftway supermarket.

In North Philly, Pastor Smith was doing a better job of urban renewal than the government.

Before I met him, however, I did the usual journalistic prep work of going upstairs to the Inquirer library, which predated computers. It was an ancient place where the librarians used to clip old stories out of newspapers, fold them up neatly so when they turned yellow they would still stay flat, and tucked inside little envelopes.

I asked the librarian to pull the files on the legendary Pastor Smith, and his church, which had the largest congregation in the city. And what did I discover?

To my surprise, nobody at the Inquirer had ever written a story about the pastor or his church!

This struck me as ignorance, as well as outright discrimination. And I was in a unique position to do something about it. But I had been told that I might be the wrong type of messenger.

At the time, the secular religion of diversity had reared its ugly head in our newsroom. And activists were loudly proclaiming that the Inquirer needed to hire more minority reporters, because, they argued, only minority reporters could truly understand and relate to minority readers.

The flip side of that argument was that guys like me just didn't get it.

Ben Smith was a fireplug of a man who wore running shoes and red paisley suspenders on his suit pants. I watched him skip up the 50 steps of his brand new, enormous sanctuary, all the way to the top pew.

“You have to be in shape to wrestle the demons,” he told me for a story that ran Aug. 17, 1992 in the Inquirer. I asked the pastor how he explained his success.

To my amazement, as Ben Smith spoke, a summer rainstorm darkened the sanctuary windows, and thunder sounded. It was right out of Cecil B. DeMille.

“In every generation, God raises up people to reveal Himself to the masses,” Pastor Smith preached to his audience of one amazed skeptic.

“That He’s not dead, that He’s very much alive," the pastor said. "He doesn’t want people because they’re great. He just calls them because they’re willing.”

Ben Smith told me taht he was born in Halifax, N.C., the son of a farmer who made moonshine. He never knew his mother. He served in the Navy during World War II as a chief petty officer. He came home to his wife, he said, with a “burning desire” to succeed.

And then, he said, his whole life promptly fell apart. His wife died at 27 of a rheumatic heart. Smith was plagued with migraine headaches. He gave up his interest in a local restaurant, and hit the road.

“I went wild,” the pastor told me. “I ran, not knowing what I was running from. . . I was a fun-loving, woman-chasing, beer-drinking, train-riding guy, running from God."

But, Smith said, God had placed a hunger in his heart, so he began to seek Him by fasting and prayer.

He asked God for a new wife, and he met and married the former Jeanette Liggins. He joined a local Baptist church and rose through the ranks of lay leaders. He got a job at a bronze and brass factory, making engine parts.

Then one day he needed a shave.

“I was looking in the mirror, shaving, and all of a sudden, the mirror wasn’t there,” the pastor said. “There was a wide open field and sick people laying on cots, all dressed in white.”

The pastor dropped his razor, fell down on his knees and started crying.

“Jan,” he told his wife, “I believe I’ve been called to preach.”

Pastor Smith recruited church members from the streets, with a team of evangelists. The "Soul Patrol" stormed the city’s subways and public housing projects on a nightly basis, looking for converts. Many church members were former alcoholics and drug addicts.

The pastor told me that he actually preferred taking in new recruits with no religious backgrounds, because he didn’t have to retrain them.

I went out one night with the Soul Patrol. Pastor Smith’s rugged team of street evangelists were a bunch of mostly big guys who freely confessed to being former alcoholics, drug addicts and criminals. One of the biggest guys leaned over and told me that I was just the kind of mugging victim he used to look for. But that was before he met up with Jesus.

Another Soul Patrol member, Therlowe Paulin, confessed that he too was a former drug addict.

“You know, God literally performs spiritual surgery,” Paulin told me. “He gives you a new heart, a new mind.”

“Before, I used to smoke marijuana and drink liquor and chase women,” Paulin said. “But He has the power to break every yoke of bondage.”

Paulin got saved. And then he told me, “The Lord is leading us to go to the darkest places in Philadelphia to share the glorious light of Jesus Christ.”

The men formed a prayer circle. I stood off to the side, notepad in hand, doing my usual number as the objective reporter. But this time around, it wasn’t going to work. A couple of big guys opened their eyes and with rough, callused hands, they yanked me into their circle.

For me, this was a new experience. After they got prayed up, the Soul Patrol hit the mission field: the Orange line of the Broad Street subway.

A thin, bearded man named Huett who wore a “Jesus is Lord” baseball cap stood up on the train and preached the Gospel loud enough for everybody to hear. A couple of bored guys in suits kept reading The Wall Street Journal and Business Week.

Huett yelled at the two suits, saying that nothing in either publication would save them if today was the day the world came to an end.

“We used to be out on the street pushing drugs,” Huett yelled, as the subway careened underground. “I know what it is to be high.”

Since he found Jesus, Huett shouted, “I ain’t never been no higher.”

When we got off the subway, the Soul Patrol formed a circle around me and proceeded to conduct a spiritual mugging.

Huett got in my face and asked where I was at. His eyes were blazing.

I told Huett the truth: I was a spiritual weakling just starting on my journey.

“At least he’s honest,” Huett said.

Then, Huett and the other members of the Soul Patrol prayed aloud over me.

“Lord, we know this man is out here just to cover a story tonight, but please Lord, make this more than a story,” Huett said, and then he asked God to change my life.

I looked around and saw men with eyes closed praying fervently for a complete stranger. For me, this was another new experience. We were standing in a subway station that reeked of urine and engine exhaust.

But that didn’t bother the Soul Patrol. The men clung to each other and after they were through praying, they sang Amazing Grace.

On Sunday when they opened the new church, the members of the Soul Patrol showed up in suits along with women in wide-brimmed hats and dresses. About 3,000 worshippers sat in brand new oak pews on unblemished mauve carpets.

After a soloist and the choir lit up the place, Pastor Smith stood in his new pulpit. It was built on the exact site of the old pitching mound where Hall of Famers like Robin Roberts and Lefty Grove once went through their windups.

That's where Ben Smith made his pitch for Jesus.

“You’re not supposed to be here in place like this, in North Philadelphia,” the pastor thundered. “You’re supposed to be in a run-down building that somebody else got tired of. But God said, ‘They’re my people. They called on my name.’ ”

And that’s why the church was built.

As far as I was concerned, the new church was a miracle. It was hard to be around the people in this church and not believe that God had personally intervened in their lives. The believers I met at Deliverance were so spiritually alive that they made me realize something about myself -- I was dead.

Suddenly, I wanted what these people had. And when I read the Bible, I discovered why I didn’t have it.

“Behold, the Lord’s hand is not shortened, that it cannot save; neither His ear heavy, that it cannot hear,” wrote Isaiah the prophet. “But your iniquities have separated you from your God; and your sins have hid His face from you, that He will not hear. For your hands are defiled with blood, and your fingers with iniquity; your lips have spoken lies, your tongue hath muttered perversity.”

As far as I was concerned, I was guilty as charged.

But there was hope. As Isaiah declared, “The people that walked in darkness have seen a great light.”

So one night after I went out with the Soul Patrol, I got down on my knees in the privacy of my own bedroom and asked Jesus to save me.

It happened 30 years ago this month. A reporter who was completely unqualified to be the religion writer for a major metropolitan newspaper, a guy who got picked for the job precisely because he was a nonbeliever, walked into a black church and promptly got converted.

More proof that God has a sense of humor.

Larry Krasner realizes he can't handle the truth

By Ralph Cipriano
for BigTrial.net

At his regular Monday morning press conference today, District Attorney Larry Krasner refused to answer my questions about his office's high-ranking trio of carpetbaggers.

We're talking about three top supervisors in the D.A.'s office who earn a total of more than $500,000 annually, but have been outed by Big Trial for flagrantly violating the City Charter's residency requirement.

That's an offense that before Krasner became D.A., used to be grounds for getting an employee fired. But since we have a D.A. who picks and chooses which laws he wants to enforce, doesn't pay his taxes, and ignores subpoenas from the state legislature, it's not much of a stretch for Krasner to act like the City Charter's residency requirement doesn't apply to his office.

Because as D.A., Larry Krasner believes he's above the law.

At the podium today, Krasner tried to insist on a format of calling on individual reporters so he could continue his unconstitutional practice of taking questions from every other reporter in town except your Big Trial correspondent. But this week, I decided I wasn't gonna play along.

"Mr. Krasner, Mr. Krasner," I began by interrupting him when he was trying to call on another reporter.

"Excuse me, no outbursts, sir," Krasner lectured, while sternly wagging a finger at me. "We are going in order."

An order that always excludes me.

Larry Krasner wags a warning finger

"Sorry sir, but you've ignored me for five straight press conferences," I replied.

"I have no other opportunity," I said, before informing him that by freezing me out of his press conferences, he was violating the First Amendment by committing viewpoint discrimination.

When cornered, the district attorney of Philadelphia dug in his heels, and for once, something truthful actually spilled out of his mouth.

"I am not calling on you," Krasner flatly stated, to indeed confirm that he was in the act of discriminating against me, before he issued a threat. "If you're not gonna stop now we're gonna have to ask you to leave."

But I had no intention of stopping.

"Robert Listenbee, Nancy Winkelman and Greg Holston, are you going to fire them for violating the City Charter's residency requirement," I asked. "Are you going to fire them, Mr. Krasner?"

When confronted with questions that he doesn't want to answer, because he has no answers, Krasner, who always considers himself the smartest guy in the room, has only two options in his rather limited playbook.

When stonewalling doesn't work, he has to run away.

"All right, were gonna call a break in this press conference," the D.A. announced. "I'll be taking questions in the back one at a time. We'll take them from channel 3, we'll take them from Mr. [Matt] Petrillo, we'll take them from Channel 6, and then WHYY."

Here, Krasner was explicitly stating, while the cameras were rolling, that he would take questions from every other reporter in the building, except me.

It was a second bold-face admission within minutes by our witless D.A. that yes indeed, he was actively practicing viewpoint discrimination against me. It's a tactic that the courts all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court have repeatedly held to be a flagrant violation of the First Amendment.

Krasner then turned tail and fled the podium past his surprised aides and press conference guests standing behind him, such as Council Member Kendra Brooks. They were all left to wonder what the hell was going on.

Then, after they started taking down the mikes, all the staff members and invited guests scattered for the exits.

Krasner, of course, was the first to go. But as the D.A. headed for a back room, and his private confabs with other reporters, I had one last message for him.

"You are violating my constitutional rights, sir," I said loudly. "As a civil rights lawyer, you should know that."

Frankly, I don't know why anybody goes to Krasner's press conferences because they're such a waste of time. Krasner holds them every week to keep the spigot of free publicity flowing, and the media lets him get away with it.

The topics of Krasner's press conferences are often mundane arrests, which Krasner uses to pretend he's tough on crime. Or Krasner gets on his soapbox to promote a Mom-and-apple pie issue such as community swimming pools, or the benefits of bicycling.

Krasner called today's press conference to announce more pablum: a grant allegedly worth "hundreds of thousands of dollars" from the U.S. Department of Justice's Office of Victims and Crime, a grant that, according to the D.A., is supposed to help elderly crime victims who've been ducking bullets lately.

Since the topics of Krasner's press conferences are so dull, however, many first-string reporters in town are off doing other stories. Even the relentlessly pro-Krasner Philadelphia Inquirer hasn't bothered to send a reporter to several recent D.A. press conferences.

Fox 29 has taken to just sending a camera person, so that the TV station can live-stream the equivalent of government-run TV emanating from the D.A.'s office, without Krasner having to deal with any tough questions.

Krasner started today's press conference by trying to keep everybody in line.

"Alright, so we are happy to take questions," he said. "I will be calling on members of the media for their questions," he said, before issuing a stern warning that was directed only at me.

"We are not going to tolerate outbursts here," Krasner said. "We are going to have an orderly conference as usual."

So, once he ran away from me, Krasner did have another orderly press conference where he presumably wouldn't have to deal with any questions he didn't want to answer. And, like trained seals, the other reporters he called out dutifully lined up in the hallway to have their private, one-on-one confabs with the D.A.

But there are some big issues out there that the rest of the media continues to practice journalistic malpractice on by not holding Krasner accountable.

Such as the residency requirement that Krasner is blatantly ignoring in his office, an issue that has upset many of the low-paid young ADAs in his office because they've been told they have to live in the city.

It's a flagrant double standard brimming with hypocrisy.

The high-ranking carpetbaggers in Krasner's office include Nancy Winkelman, who's paid $176, 171 as the supervisor of the D.A.'s law division. Winkelman twice claimed on campaign finance reports last year that she lives in a rundown rental property in West Philly with a coffin in front. But where she really resides is in a house on a scenic lake in scenic Medford Lakes, N.J.

Meanwhile, while Winkelman is flagrantly violating the City Charter, her old law firm, Schnader, Harrison, Segal & Lewis LLP has been raking it in. According to records released today by the city Solicitor's office under the Right To Know law, the city of Philadelphia has hired the Schnader firm 31 times since Krasner took office after Jan. 1, 2018, earning the firm a total windfall to date of $2,966,133.

Nice work if you can get it.

The second high-ranking carpetbagger in Krasner's office is Gregory Holston, a disbarred lawyer who earns $140,000 as Krsaner's senior advisor on advocacy and policy, and lives in Sicklerville, N.J.

The third high-ranking carpetbagger is Robert Listenbee, who, as Krasner's First Assistant D.A., uses as a phony address an apartment in East Mount Airy where his daughter lives. Listenbee earns $187,171 annually while he goes home every night to his home in Glenside.

Since Listenbee is registered to vote in East Mount Airy, he's also committed voter fraud by voting in the last two elections. A spokesman for the state attorney general's office, however, which is tasked with investigating voter fraud, did not respond to a request for comment.

With AG Josh Shapiro running for governor, apparently no one in his office wants to deal with voter fraud in the D.A.'s office.

Meanwhile, First Assistant District Attorney Listenbee has gone into hiding.

On the press release promoting today's press conference, Listenbee was listed as one of the attendees. But today, Listenbee, who usually stands right behind Krasner at these weekly press conferences, failed to show up.

In fact, Listenbee, who was out of work last Thursday and Friday, hasn't shown his face at the office since he was outed by Big Trial.

Another big issue that the media has been too timid to call Krasner on -- last month, state Supreme Court Justice Kevin Dougherty publicly accused Krasner of abusing the grand jury process and hiding relevant case law so the grand jury would falsely indict former police officer Ryan Pownall for murder.

Larry Krasner exits stage right

Since Jane Roh, Krasner's spokesperson gave a no comment to the Inquirer, not one reporter in town has asked Krasner what his response is to the state Supreme Court justice's incendiary charges.

Then, of course, there's the matter of Krasner, allegedly the top law enforcement officer in town, being a habitual tax deadbeat.

Big Trial outed Krasner on April 29th for his latest deadbeat behavior in stiffing the city and the city school district. But in the past four months, no reporter has had the nerve to ask the D.A. when he's going to pay his back taxes, which as of today, amount to $79,521.06.

And finally, there's the matter of the historic murder spree that's been going in this town for the past two years. It's a murder spree that Krasner continues to insist has nothing to do with his policy of routinely granting lenient sentences to those caught illegally carrying guns.

Or his incompetent and poorly trained prosecutors who have a deadly habit of allowing armed and dangerous felons to slip through their hands. So they can go right back out on the street again and become repeat violent offenders.

Over the weekend, Philadelphia had 27 non-fatal shootings and 7 homicides. As of last night, the city is up to 361 homicides, a 3% increase over last year's historic rate of 562 homicides.

Yet the media continues to let Krasner get away with claiming that none of the gun violence is his fault.

No wonder he's so eager to call on all of his favorite reporters at his weekly press conferences. While the citizens the media is supposed to inform are getting shot, carjacked and murdered in record numbers.

Racially rabid Lisa Hughes

By Ralph Cipriano
for BigTrial.net

Don't look now but that noted anti-racism crusader, Lisa Hughes, publisher and CEO of The Philadelphia Inquirer, has just been publicly accused of -- gasp, shriek -- racism!

Hughes, as you remember, is the rabid ideologue who branded her own newspaper as racist for having published a headline in 2020 that said, "Buildings Matter, Too."

That headline, according to Hughes, committed the "grievous and unpardonable offense" of offending a group of corrupt and grifting Marxists known as Black Lives Matter.

That allegedly racist headline prompted Hughes to declare that henceforth, the Inquirer would become a crusading "anti-racist" newspaper.

Hughes gained more notoriety as a deranged lunatic when she began publishing the "More Perfect Union" series. This dubious endeavor, financed with a $1.3 million grant from the gullible Lenfest Institute for Journalism, is in the process of indicting every major institution in town for the sin of systemic racism, dating back centuries, starting, of course, with The Philadelphia Inquirer.

Yesterday, however, a newly created rainbow coalition of minority journalists issued a manifesto that publicly demanded an immediate sit-down with Hughes and Inquirer Editor Gabriel Escobar for not living up to their previously stated diversity goals. And if Hughes and Escobar don't bow to their demands, the coalition threatened to launch a nasty PR campaign that would allegedly expose Hughes and Escobar for being a couple of racist hypocrites!

This upcoming clash not only will provide the rest of us with more entertainment, but it's also a chance to witness the Shakespearian spectacle of Hughes being hoisted with her own petard.

The most recent racial troubles at the Inquirer appear to have been instigated by Ernest Owens, a black and openly gay firebrand who's made a successful career out of being a racial provocateur.

Owens previously inspired Tom McGrath, the former editor-in- chief of Philly mag, to voluntarily resign because he realized he was guilty of the sin of being a "middle-aged white guy." Owens then became Philly mag's first black and openly gay editor-at-large.

Now that's what I call racial progress, Ernest Owens style!

In his latest campaign, Owens, as President of the Philadelphia Association of Black Journalists, has joined forces with the Philadelphia chapter of the Asian American Journalists Association, and the Philadelphia chapter of the National Association of Hispanic Journalists, to create a new advocacy group known as J.A.W.N.. as in the Journalism Accountability Watchdog Network.

And the new coalition has targeted the Inky for failing to live up to a bunch of promises to further diversify the newsroom at that supposedly already-diversified publication:

These failures have led to the loss of multiple journalists of color within the newsroom over the last year, and as a result there are now zero Black male reporters at the paper outside of the sports desk.

This means we are missing out on important perspectives to cover critical topics like public safety, housing, education, the LGBTQIA+ community, food insecurity, poverty and Black culture within Philadelphia.

Martin Luther King Jr. famously said, "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."

But that's not what Ernest Owens and friends believe. Only minority reporters, they say, can cover minorities and minority issues. And in their open letter to the Inquirer, the new rainbow coalition flexed its muscles by issuing demands:

We stand united in our individual and collective attempts to work with the Inquirer to address these failures and demand a meeting with you to determine our next steps in remedying this and to discuss other grievances our organizations and our communities have previously raised with you.

As diversity devotees, the new coalition relied on a Temple study that held up a racial ruler to the Inky's news columns, and found the paper wanting:

Some of the most disheartening revelations from Temple’s 118-page diversity report found that Inquirer stories cover Black people only 26.4% of the time (compared to 58.8% of the time for white people). Of those stories about Black people, 53% are about sports.

The Temple study also conducted a census of the racial makeup of newsroom and found more disturbing news:

The report at the time also revealed that only 13.6% of Inquirer staff is Black (compared to 77.3% white), with co-chairs of the audit stating that “the Inquirer tends to cover white people the most” and “white reporters tend to write about white people even more.”

This led the Owens-led rainbow coalition to declare a public emergency:

Now the Inquirer has zero (0%) Black male news reporters of a staff that is predominantly white covering a majority-BIPOC city. There are no Black male reporters outside of sports — none in features, none in breaking news, none in investigations, none in business, none in health, and none on the new communities desk.

The rainbow coalition then issued an ominous threat:

The time for airing our grievances and waiting for the Inquirer to make glacial-moving DEI [Diversity, Equity and Inclusion] changes has now neared its end.

We demand that the powers that be at the Inquirer immediately initiate good-faith, consistent and transparent communications with J.A.W.N. We demand dedicated meetings with Lisa Hughes, Gabe Escobar, the paper’s leadership and the board of directors.

Hughes and Escobar, who are of course busy because they're under siege, did not respond to a request for comment. They're just hoping that Jesse Jackson doesn't come to town.

Accompanying their demand for access, Owens and friends actually threatened to drive our beloved paper of record into extinction:

If the paper fails to fulfill this demand, J.A.W.N. will initiate a public campaign against the Inquirer. As part of this campaign, we will let the public know that the paper of record has continued to fail to live up to its anti-racist PR mantra, and that its coverage continues to harm, divide and build distrust among the communities of color it so clearly needs if it plans to survive in Philadelphia.

Holy Diversity Crisis!

This, of course, is a breaking story of major importance as fearless diversity warriors take on pandering anti-racist newspaper execs now hiding under their desks.

Meanwhile, don't be surprised if this dust-up ends with the historic appointment of a new Inky editor-at-large named . . . Ernest Owens!

UPDATE: Lisa Hughes speaks!

In an email today to her comrades, er colleagues, Inquirer Publisher & CEO Lisa Hughes decried the "incredibly misleading,""incredibly disheartening" and totally "unwarranted attack" by JAWN on the Inquirer's unshakable commitment to diversity, equity and inclusion.

Hughes, who, according to sources, still lives in New York City, also pledged to fight back against the Ernest Owens-led attackers:

Although there are voices outside of our organization looking to downplay and disregard the hard work that goes on each and every day at The Inquirer, we know better. We will not be discouraged, and we will not give in to their demands, threats, and belittlement.

Hughes's speech, sadly all of which we don't have the space to print here, drew immediate comparisons to the opening monologue by the late actor George C. Scott in the classic movie Patton.

Hughes vs. Owens.

The diversity death match is on!

By Ralph Cipriano
for BigTrial.net

On Tuesday, President Biden gave a speech at Wilkes University to tout his "Safer America Plan" that would put some 100,000 new cops out on the street.

Among the president's invited guests was Philadelphia Police Commissioner Danielle Outlaw.

While Outlaw was welcome at the president's sparsely-attended speech in a college gymnasium, the P.C.'s 9 mm Glock 17 Luger pistol wasn't. The president's staff wanted the TV cameras to show lots of cops in uniform literally standing behind the president. But the Secret Service wanted to ensure the president's safety.

So before all those cops could take a seat in the stands and applaud the "Big Guy" and his Safer America Plan, the Secret Service required all those cops who were spectators, including Outlaw and two of her aides, to voluntarily turn over their guns.

Some cops and reporters questioned why Outlaw would drive two hours north to attend Biden's speech when he was due to appear in Philadelphia two days later. There's also the matter of both a mayoral directive as well as a police department directive that prohibit Philly cops from doing any politicking on the job that would involve promoting one political candidate over another.

But a spokesperson for Outlaw said that the event in Wilkes Barre wasn't about politics, it was about a sitting president advocating a plan to fund more cops on the street. And that's why Outlaw was there, to support that plan.

"Police Commissioner Outlaw was invited by the White House to attend a speech by President Biden announcing funding in support of law enforcement; particularly federal funding to hire, train, and retain an additional 100,000 police officers across the United States," explained Sgt. Eric Gripp in an email.

"P.C. Outlaw has remained a vocal supporter of the need to bolster our department’s ranks with additional police officers since her arrival in Philadelphia, and welcomes the opportunity for PPD to receive federal funds that would put more officers on the streets of our city," said Gripp, who also attended the event in Wilkes-Barre along with Corporal Jasmine Reilly, another Outlaw spokesperson.

The Wilkes-Barre speech was originally planned last month, but had to be postponed after Biden came down with Covid.

Gripp did confirm that before Outlaw and her two aides were allowed to sit in the stands some 50 feet behind the president, they had to agree to voluntarily turn over their guns, as well as their cellphones.

"The Secret Service did not allow PPD Officers in attendance at the event to be in possession of their firearms," Gripp wrote.

Sgt. Gripp, however, bristled at suggestions that in driving to Wilkes Barre to hear Biden's speech, Police Commissioner Outlaw was engaging in politicking.

"Commissioner Outlaw was not on hand to 'rally' or otherwise 'take a stand'" on behalf of a political candidate, Gripp wrote.

"As an appointed public official, the Police Commissioner both works with and regularly attends public/press events in support of initiatives/programs along with other state, local, and federal elected/appointed officials," Gripp wrote.

The rally at Wilkes University was attended by Gov. Tom Wolf, Attorney General Josh Shapiro, and U.S. Senator Bob Casey.

"Public support for initiatives proposed by elected or appointed officials -- made in the official capacity of his or her office -- does not equal support and/or endorsement for the individual holding the office," Gripp wrote.

At Wilkes Barre, the president did tout his Safer America Plan that he said will spend $350 billion to hire more cops to "make communities safer."

"Here in Pennsylvania, Governor Wolf is using $250 million of that money to reduce crime and violence across the state," the president said.

But during his speech, Biden did some politicking on behalf of Democrats running for office in Pennsylvania.

Biden hailed Josh Shapiro as a "champion for the rule of law as your Attorney General, and he’s going to make one hell of a governor."

Biden described Pennsylvania Lt. Gov. John Fetterman as a "hell of a guy" and "a powerful voice for working people" who’s "going to make a great United States senator."

During his speech, Biden also took the opportunity to rip "every Republican in the Senate, every single one" who "flat-out" voted against his Safer America Plan.

The president also threw some shade on his "MAGA Republican friends in Congress" who claim they're for law and order.

“You can’t be pro-law enforcement and pro-insurrection,” Biden said.

In an interview with the Pennsylvania Capital-Star, Outlaw spoke in favor of Biden's plan, saying it was a step in the right direction. She told the newspaper that she was happy with the president's “overall recognition that public safety is an ecosystem." Because cops, she said, have to work alongside social service providers, among others, to ensure public safety.

Gripp, a registered Republican, admitted he had some uncomfortable moments while sitting through Biden's speech. He said he wanted to make sure he was seen clapping in support of the president's Safer America Plan. But he also wanted make sure that he was not seen clapping when Biden was trashing Republicans.

It was also strange to be in uniform, Gripp said, and not have your gun or your cell phone. But every time Gripp patted one of his empty pockets, he noticed a Secret Service agent glaring at him.

When it comes to politicking, Biden, of course, outdid himself two days after his Wilkes-Bare speech when he traveled to Philadelphia. The theme of his speech was the continuing battle over "The Soul Of The Nation," but it gave Biden a chance to launch a full-blown attack on a certain former president and his loyal supporters.

"Donald Trump and the MAGA Republicans represent an extremism that threatens the very foundations of our republic," Biden stated.

"MAGA forces are determined to take this country backwards," Biden said. "Backwards to an America where there is no right to choose, no right to privacy, no right to contraception, no right to marry who you love."

"They promote authoritarian leaders, and they fan the flames of political violence that are a threat to our personal rights, to the pursuit of justice, to the rule of law, to the very soul of this country," Biden said.

It was enough to make a Republican squirm.

"That was 100 percent a political rally," Sgt. Gripp agreed. So that's why when Biden came to Philadelphia to give that speech, Gripp said, the police commissioner skipped the event.

So Outlaw didn't want to be perceived as politicking on behalf of a president when he was blatantly politicking.

But the day before, on Wednesday, some cops and reporters wondered again why Outlaw was out in Southwest Philadelphia with City Council member Kenyatta Johnson participating in a "Peace Not Guns Safety Walk" organized by Johnson.

The event took place on the 6400 and 6500 blocks of Kingsessing Street. Outlaw, Capt. Joseph Green, the commander of the 12th Police District, and some community leaders went door to door to listen to the concerns of neighbors who claimed they felt like prisoners in their own homes.

They have good reason to feel that way. As of last night, the Philly murder toll stood at 364 dead bodies, a 2% increase over last year's historic pace when the city racked up 562 murders.

With all those bullets flying, "I think it's important for folks to see us," Outlaw told CBS Philly.

But during the walk, Council member Johnson was seen carrying fliers. Johnson also has the distinction of being the only City Council member under criminal indictment.

Johnson, his wife and two co-defendants are scheduled to be retried on federal bribery charges this fall. When he went on trial the first time, in April, U.S. District Judge Gerald A. McHugh had to declare a mistrial after the jury announced it was hopelessly deadlocked.

When asked about Council member Johnson and his fliers, Sgt. Gripp said, "It comes down to this is what politicians do."

"The line between politicking and action in the official capacity of their office is muddy," Sgt. Gripp conceded. "Just being out there with them doesn't necessary mean we support everything that candidate supports."

By Ralph Cipriano
for BigTrial.net

A trio of lawyers representing Larry Krasner filed a petition in Commonwealth Court last week that seeks to prevent the state House of Representatives from impeaching the D.A.

There's simply no honest way to defend Krasner's horrendous record on prosecuting crime. So to get the D.A. out of a political jam, Krasner's legal team had to resort to telling four big lies.

They also had to circle the wagons around an ongoing cover up of Krasner's blatant prosecutorial misconduct in a high profile murder case involving a cop.

Here's the lies that Krasner's defense team is peddling:

Big Lie No. 1 -- Krasner is not really "soft on crime."

Big Lie No. 2 -- Here, Krasner's legal defense team kicked it up a notch with this whopper -- "Truth be told, the DAO under District Attorney Krasner has been very effective in prosecuting crime."

Big Lie No. 3 -- The D.A., well known for cooking up his own crime stats, supposedly has a conviction rate in homicide cases at trial of "just shy of 90%." Yeah, right.

Big Lie No. 4 -- The D.A. allegedly hands out tough sentences on gun crimes. Well, not really.

Sadly, Big Trial is the only media outlet in town that will use readily available stats from the D.A.'s own Public Data Dashboard, as well as court records, to debunk these blatant lies.

We'll also explain the ongoing cover up in the D.A.'s office that involves Krasner's defense team trying to hide the complete files and corrupt grand jury proceedings in the case of former Police Officer Ryan Pownall, whom Krasner falsely indicted for murder.

It's a case where no less than a state Supreme Court Justice, Kevin Dougherty, has formally accused Krasner of abusing the grand jury process to indict Pownall, as well as hiding relevant case law from grand jurors so they wouldn't know there was a legal justification for Pownall's use of deadly force.

The purpose of Krasner's unconstitutional acts, the state Supreme justice said, was to get grand jurors to produce a "slanted" grand jury presentment that Krasner could feed to the media. So the media would tar and feather the defendant before he went to trial.

The facts that we're going to lay out will not appear in The Philadelphia Inquirer, the city's alleged paper of record.

Why?

Because the editors at that progressive publication have already gone on record regarding their take on the impeachment of their fellow progressive, Larry Krasner. A politician that the Inquirer continues to support, while turning a blind eye to two years of historic bloodshed that's ongoing in this town involving record numbers of shootings, murders and carjackings.

For example, over the past Labor Day weekend, the city racked up 33 shootings and 10 murders. That boosts our body count to 373 murders so far this year, a 3% increase over last year's all-time record pace that resulted in 562 murders.

But back on June 24th, ignoring the bloodshed, the Inquirer editorial board denounced the state House of Representatives' proposal to impeach Krasner as a political "sideshow" and a "ruse" that was "going nowhere."

Any attempt to impeach Krasner, the Inquirer's editors opined, was a waste of time and taxpayers' money, and an attempt to disenfranchise the voters of Philadelphia who twice elected Krasner as D.A.

Krasner, however, appears to be taking the alleged impeachment sideshow more seriously than his allies at the Inquirer, after he got hit with a barrage of subpoenas from the state House of Representatives.

So on Saturday, the Inquirer assigned the inept Harold Brubaker to write an obligatory news story about Krasner's filing in Commonwealth Court that seeks to prevent the state House of Representatives from impeaching the D.A. In his shallow story, Brubaker didn't bother to challenge the veracity of the specious arguments in the 40 pages of nonsense filed by Krasner's lawyers.

Nor did Brubaker mention that the D.A.'s cover up in the Pownall case was the subject of a recent blistering opinion written by state Supreme Court justice Dougherty.

The only useful thing the Inquirer did in publishing the story under Brubaker's byline was to embed the full text of Krasner's 83-page filing. So that curious readers could dig through those pages and discover for themselves the lies and ongoing cover up promulgated by the D.A.'s office.

All right, the court of public opinion is now in session. And Larry Krasner and his phony petition are now on trial.

Let's start with the big lies.

Big Lie No. 1 & 2

Big Lie No. 1 -- Krasner is not "soft on crime."

Big Lie No. 2 -- "Truth be told, the DAO under District Attorney Krasner has been very effective in prosecuting crime."

We can deal with these two lies simultaneously.

The truth is that Krasner is soft on crime, and the figures from his own Public Data Dashboard clearly show it. Those same figures also adamantly disprove the laughable claim that Krasner has been "very effective in prosecuting crime."

Shortly after he took office, Krasner announced that he would no longer prosecute crimes such as prostitution, drug possession, and retail theft under $500.

On top of that, Krasner fired 31 of his most senior prosecutors and replaced them with novices fresh out of law school or fellow progressives recruited from the ranks of public defenders.

Then, Krasner staffed his charging unit -- the assistant D.A.'s who decide which cases to prosecute -- with mostly neophytes who apparently were instructed to very strict on accepting cases.

For example, last year the D.A.'s charging unit declined to issue an arrest warrant for a career criminal who was captured on video shooting his former girlfriend three times, once in the chest and twice in the stomach.

In addition to the incriminating video evidence, the woman had identified her former boyfriend as the shooter to a total of seven witnesses, including a 911 operator, cops at the scene and a medic who drove her to the hospital.

But that wasn't enough evidence for the D.A.'s charging unit to issue an arrest warrant. Until Big Trial publicized the case, and the D.A.'s charging unit promptly reversed itself, without the benefit of any additional evidence. They were simply publicly embarrassed into doing the right thing.

Earlier this year, another legal genius in Krasner's charging unit couldn't decide whether a guy who physically assaulted and bit two police officers, drawing blood, should be prosecuted. Why? Because, the ADA wrote, the suspect, who was incoherent and high on drugs, may not have been mentally capable of harboring criminal intent.

With Krasner declaring some crimes legal, plus the incompetent prosecutors in his office, and his incompetent charging unit, you can understand why the D.A.'s office under Krasner isn't doing the volume on prosecuting crime that our previous D.A. was doing.

Here's what the stats taken from the DAO's own Public Data Dashboard show about prosecuting crime in the D.A.'s office:

In 2014, under former D.A. Seth Williams, the D.A.'s office charged a total of 43,228 criminal cases.

But by 2021 under D.A. Larry Krasner, the total of all cases charged by the D.A.'s office had fallen by 47%, all the way down to 22,867 cases.

So the reform prosecutors in Krasner's office were literally doing nearly half the workload that the D.A.'s office used to do under former D.A. Seth Williams.

But did that drastic reduction in caseloads result in Krasner's progressive A.D.A.'s being more effective at prosecuting crime?

No. When it came to prosecuting crime, Krasner's progressive prosecutors turned out to be way less effective than their predecessors.

In 2014 under former D.A. Seth Williams, the conviction rate in the D.A.'s office for all crimes was 50.7%.

By 2021 under Larry Krasner, the conviction rate in the D.A.'s office for all crimes had fallen all the way down to 22.6%.

Now, let's take a look at the prosecution of violent offenses, defined as: homicides, attempted murder, non-fatal shootings, rape, robbery with a deadly weapon, robbery, aggravated assault, simple assault, assault, sexual assaults, arson, carjacking and other violent crimes.

The majority of these crimes are committed by a relatively small percentage of repeat violent offenders that Krasner has publicly pledged to concentrate his office's efforts on bringing to justice.

In 2014, the D.A.'s office under Seth Williams prosecuted a total of 10,190 violent offenses.

But by 2021, the D.A.'s office under Larry Krasner had prosecuted a total of 6,491 violent offenses, a 36% decrease.

Did that reduced caseload, however, result in Krasner's progressive prosecutors being more effective at prosecuting violent crime?

Once again, the answer is no. Once again, it turned out that Krasner's progressive prosecutors were less effective at prosecuting violent crime.

In 2014 under former D.A. Seth Williams, the conviction rate for prosecuting violent crime was 41.0%.

By 2021 under Progressive Larry Krasner, the conviction rate for prosecuting violent crimes had fallen to just 24.1%.

Big Lie No. 3 -- The D.A. supposed conviction rate in homicide cases "just shy of 90%.

According to Krasner's lawyers, "Truth be told, the DAO under District Attorney Krasner has been very effective in prosecuting crime."

"For example, the DAO’s conviction rate in homicide cases at the trial level since January 2021 is just shy of 90%, which compares favorably to that of his predecessors."

This is another example of a phony stat cooked up by Krasner to obscure his real record. In restricting the conviction rate to "homicide cases at the trial level since January 2021," Krasner chose to ignore a total of 48 homicide cases in 2021 and 2022 that were either voluntarily withdrawn by the D.A.'s office or dismissed by a judge for lack of evidence, typically at a preliminary hearing.

Why did the D.A. not want to include those 48 homicide cases that had been either withdrawn by the D.A.'s office or dismissed by judges? To lower the number of homicide cases in his sample, so he could inflate his won-lost record at homicide trials.

The other elephant in the room is that Krasner has very few prosecutors in his depleted office who are capable and experienced enough to prosecute a homicide. For proof, there's Anthony Voci, Krasner's former head of homicide, who was demoted after he was involved in a road rage incident involving a young female motorist.

The cops, with Voci in tow, had the woman arrested and her car impounded.

The charges were subsequently dropped and the female motorist sued for damages. The road rage incident was the subject of an internal police investigation involving Voci and former Deputy Police Commissioner Ben Naish, who recently resigned.

While Naish is gone, Voci is back prosecuting homicide cases in the D.A.'s office because Krasner has so few homicide prosecutors who know what they're doing.

Another factor in evaluating Krasner's record at prosecuting homicide cases is that because he has so few prosecutors capable of prosecuting a homicide case, Krasner's usual strategy in a homicide case is to pitch plea bargain offers to defendants that are so lenient, they're too good to turn down.

But regarding that 90% conviction rate at homicide trials, that's a stat invented by Krasner.

To get the real numbers, let's return to the D.A.'s own Public Data dashboard, and factor the withdrawn or dismissed homicide cases into the conviction rates.

In 2014, under former D.A. Seth Williams, the D.A.'s office had a conviction rate on homicide cases at trial of 87.2%.

Since Jan. 1, 2021, the D.A.'s office under Krasner has a conviction rate of 72.6%. That's simply not "just shy of 90%," as Krasner's lawyers had claimed.

Krasner's lawyers -- John S. Summers, Cary L. Rice and Andrew M. Erdle of the firm of Hangley Aronchick Segal Pudlin & Schiller -- did not respond to a request for comment on why they had to resort to lies and phony stats to defend Krasner from impeachment.

Big Lie No. 4 -- Krasner is tough on sentencing in gun cases

Here's what Krasner's lawyers had to say about this topic:

"And the average prison sentence in illegal gun possession cases in Philadelphia is actually higher than that of other counties in the Commonwealth, according to a recent report by the Pennsylvania Commission on Sentencing."

Here, Krasner's lawyers are relying on a apples-to-oranges study that surveys the prison sentences handed out in gun crimes in Philadelphia with every other city, town and village in the state. All of which have much lower rates of crimes involving guns, as well as less serious gun crimes.

For instance, Krasner's lawyers are happy to use a study that contrasts the prison sentences handed out in Philadelphia, with its population of 1.58 million and a record 562 murders last year, with the city of Harrisburg, population 49,247, where they had 14 murders last year, and the city of Lancaster, population 59,321, where they had 4 murders last year.

Here's something Larry Krasner and his lawyers will never tell you -- In prosecuting gun crimes, it's the policy of the D.A.'s office under Krasner to routinely give out sentences that are well below state sentencing guidelines.

According to those state guidelines, the maximum sentence on a VUFA charge [Violation of the Uniform Firearms Act] that's a first-degree misdemeanor, such as carrying a firearm in public, is up to five years in jail.

For a third-degree felony such as carrying a firearm without a license, it's up to seven years in jail.

But that's not the kind of sentences that D.A. Krasner negotiates, and that judges are imposing.

Krasner's typical sentence for anyone caught illegally carrying a gun is a county sentence of 11 1/2 to 23 months in jail.

According to court records, only 41 of 176 defendants who were arrested for illegally carrying guns in July and August of 2019 and subsequently convicted, or 23% got sentenced to a state prison for at least one year.

And only five of those 41 state sentences, or 12%, were sentences that fell within the state legislature's recommended sentencing guidelines.

All of this shows that Krasner is not tough on sentences for gun crimes, he's lenient. And that's why so many armed and dangerous felons wind up back on the streets, so they can commit more crimes.

In an interview last month, The New York Times attributed this statement to Krasner: "Only a small fraction of the people who are arrested for carrying guns without permits are the ones actually driving the violence, Mr. Krasner said."

But a recent Big Trial survey of gun arrests made in July and August of 2019 shows that out of 472 defendants charged with allegedly carrying illegal guns, a total of 193, or 40.9%, were rearrested for allegedly committing a total of 304 alleged new crimes that included 14 murders, 20 nonfatal shootings, 9 robberies/carjackings, 4 rapes, plus 90 new cases of allegedly carrying illegal guns.

The Cover Up In the Pownall Case

Here's what Krasner's lawyers said about the Pownall case.

The Select Committee has targeted District Attorney Krasner because of his office’s ongoing prosecution of a former Philadelphia police officer who shot a Black man twice in the back. Specifically, the Subpoena seeks the DAO’s "complete case file" and the investigating grand jury records related to the investigation and prosecution of former officer Ryan Pownall.

Former officer Pownall is charged with third degree murder in connection with the shooting death of David Jones. A trial is scheduled for this fall. This effort to investigate the - DAO’s handling of a pending (high profile) murder case, especially so close to trial, is improper. It also shows that the Select Committee’s real grievance is not that District Attorney Krasner is “soft on crime” but that he is not “soft on crime” when it comes to prosecuting police officers who commit violent crimes.

To make matters worse, in his zeal to investigate District Attorney Krasner in connection with his office’s handling of the Pownall case, the Chair of the so-called “Select Committee on Restoring Law and Order” has served a subpoena that calls on the DAO to break the law by producing secret investigating grand jury records that are protected, by law, from disclosure. As the Select Committee and most members of the public know, investigating grand jury records are required to be kept secret, and disclosure of such records can be a crime.

State Supreme Court Justice Kevin Dougherty took a different view of the D.A.'s grand jury prosecution of the Pownall case. According to what Dougherty wrote in his concurring opinion, in the Pownall case, instead of being tough on crimes committed by cops, the D.A.'s office under Krasner was “driven by a win-at-all-cost office culture” that "treats police officers differently than other criminal defendants."

"This is the antithesis of what the law expects of a prosecutor," Dougherty wrote, adding that under the law, a prosecutor is supposed to be a "minister of justice."

In his concurring opinion, Justice Dougherty wrote that Krasner's office didn't inform the grand jury about the relevant case law involving justifiable use of force by a police officer. A state statute says that a police officer is "justified in using deadly force only when he believes that such force is necessary to prevent death or serious bodily injury to himself or such other person."

What Really Happened In The Pownall Case

According to former Detective Derrick Jacobs, who investigated the Pownall shooting on behalf of the Philadelphia Police Department, that's exactly what happened in the Pownall case.

A Corrupt Grand Jury Process

Not only did Krasner fix the grand jury process by not informing the grand jurors of the relevant case law, but the D.A. may have also tampered with evidence. Which may explain why the legislators pursuing the impeachment of Krasner may want to see those files.

Tampering with the law in this case, and possibly tampering with the evidence as well, isn't the full extent of Krasner's unconstitutional actions regarding former Police Officer Pownall.

In his crusade to retroactively change the law, Krasner got all the way up to the state Supreme Court before it denied his appeal.

And for the past five years, Krasner's actions in the case have effectively denied Pownall his Sixth Amendment right to a "speedy and public trial by an impartial jury," as well as the right "to be confronted with the witnesses against him."

Despite the findings of a state Supreme Court justice, Krasner's lawyers seek to continue the coverup of the rampant prosecutorial misconduct in the Pownall case.

By Ralph Cipriano
for BigTrial.net

He was rude and argumentative, arrogant and condescending, as well as downright insulting.

But let's cut District Attorney Larry Krasner some slack.

After literally running away from Big Trial at five recent press conferences over the past 11 weeks, today the D.A. finally summoned up enough courage to stand his ground and actually call on somebody in the local media who might ask him a tough question.

It happened during the last five minutes of a 55-minute joint press conference where Krasner had shared the stage with Philly's other two top leaders who are similarly clueless on how to stop the gun violence -- Mayor Jim Kenney and Police Commissioner Danielle Outlaw.

"Alright, Mr. Cipriano, do you have a question that's on the subject mater of this press conference," Krasner asked, at yet another forum that the D.A. was sponsoring where the topic was Philadelphia's latest senseless act of murder.

"I certainly do, Mr. Krasner," I replied.

For the past five years, I began, the D.A. has blamed police, judges, witnesses who don't show up in court, as well as drugs, poverty, lousy schools and the pandemic for the historic levels of gun violence in Philadelphia.

The one person the D.A. never blames, I pointed out, was Larry Krasner.

While I was trying to ask my question, Krasner was adjusting his glasses, licking his lips and grimacing.

He also kept interrupting me.

First, he charged that I had mischaracterized his comments.

Then, he grew more hostile.

"Is there a question at the end of your speech?" Krasner demanded. "What's the question, sir . . . Sir, is there a question . . . what's the question?"

"For all the record violence that we've had," I asked Krasner after he finally shut up, "homicides, shootings and carjackings in record numbers for two straight years, are you still saying that your policies have nothing to do with the increase in gun violence?"

"Yes," Krasner arrogantly replied. "And I think every bit of data supports that."

What followed was a typical Larry Krasner performance, where he used an obscure and irrelevant comparison, along with a dash of his own home-cooked crime stats, to cover up his lousy record on prosecuting crime.

After giving himself another complete pass on bearing any responsibility for the record amount of bloodshed in the city, Krasner went off on a tangent about Mesa, Az, population 508,418. The Philly D.A. claimed Mesa has the highest recent increase in the level of homicides in America, as well as a traditional Republican prosecutor.

"Look at Mesa," Krasner preached. "If we actually look at what's going on across the United States," he said, you'll find that "there's no correlation whatsoever between whether a jurisdiction has a progressive prosecutor or a traditional one, and the levels of homicides they're experiencing."

Here, Krasner was talking up Mesa, a small city in Arizona that over a 10-year period from 2010 to 2019 vacillated between 11 and 23 annual murders.

The D.A. was trying to use Mesa to make an anecdotal, apples-to-oranges comparison with Philadelphia, a city of 1.58 million. When Krasner first got elected D.A. in 2017, Philadelphia had 315 murders. And then, under Krasner's reign, the annual body count has escalated to a record 562 murders last year, a 78% increase.

Meanwhile, we're up to 384 murders so far this year, a 4% increase over last year's record pace.

And what's going on in Mesa? Between 2017 and 2021, while Philadelphia under Krasner saw a 78% jump in annual murders, Mesa went from 23 murders in 2017 to 31 homicides last year, according to the Mesa Police Department, a 34.7% increase in murders.

Philly's increase in the murder rate under you, Mr. D.A., is more than double the increase in the murder rate than in Mesa.

But none of the body count is Larry Krasner's fault, he said, when asked point-blank about it. Even though the incompetent and inexperienced prosecutors in Krasner office routinely hand out lenient sentences, under Krasner's orders, as well as outright passes, to armed and dangerous felons, so they can go out and victimize more people.

Using small cities as anecdotal evidence to play down the historic murder levels in Philadelphia is an old trick of Krasner's. During his reelection campaign, he frequently cited a fatally flawed study financed by one of his billionaire donors.

The study allegedly showed that Philadelphia, with a 27% increase in homicides in 2020, ranked just 23rd on a list of 34 cities that compared annual increases in municipal murder rates.

But the study that compared the rise in municipal murder rates across the country, which was topped by four small cities, got Philadelphia's increase wrong.

It was a 40% increase in murders, not 27%.

The study also got the percentages wrong regarding the increase in municipal murder rates for 30 of the 34 surveyed cities. But that didn't stop Krasner and his friends in the progressive media from using the fatally flawed study to prop up Krasner's pathetic record on crimefighting.

After our initial exchange today, Krasner then looked to the other side of the room, searching for another reporter to call on, when I yelled, "Follow up question, Mr. Krasner?"

I then talked about how the incompetent and inexperienced prosecutors in Krasner's office are prosecuting nearly 50% less criminal cases than the prosecutors who worked for former D.A. Seth Williams.

Keep in mind, each D.A. had approximately 300 lawyers on staff.

And then I mentioned that the conviction rate of 50.7% under former D.A. Williams in 2014 had fallen all the way down to 22.6% last year under D.A. Krasner.

"Your office is doing 50 percent less criminal prosecutions," I told Krasner. Meanwhile, with half the caseload, the conviction rate had fallen from 50.7% to 22.6%.

"Would that point to the fact you're just not getting the job done, Mr,. Krasner?"

While I asked that question, Krasner was adjusting his glasses again and licking his lips.

"Well, uh first of all, I don't accept your numbers," Krasner said, before adding, "I'm not sure you know how to read those numbers."

I tried to explain that I read them off the D.A.'s Public Data Dashboard, but Krasner started yelling at me over the microphone so that nobody would hear my explanation.

"Excuse me, let me finish," he said loudly. "Let me finish. "Excuse me, let me finish."

Krasner then blamed the police for deciding to not make arrests on certain crimes during the pandemic.

"I do not propose to tell them what to do," he said about the cops, before rolling out a home-brewed crime stat.

"Our conviction rate when it comes to the trial level for homicide cases is about 90%," he said.

"That's a misleading stat," I replied, but Krasner was giving a loud speech at the mike with the sole intention once again of drowning me out.

In restricting the conviction rate to "homicide cases at the trial level since January 2021," Krasner chose to ignore a total of 48 homicide cases in 2021 and 2022 that were either voluntarily withdrawn by the D.A.'s office or dismissed by a judge for lack of evidence, typically at a preliminary hearing.

The real numbers are posted on the D.A.'s own Public Data dashboard. And when you factor the withdrawn or dismissed homicide cases into the conviction rates, here's what you get.

In 2014, under former D.A. Seth Williams, the D.A.'s office had a conviction rate on homicide cases at trial of 87.2%.

Since Jan. 1, 2021, the D.A.'s office under Krasner has a conviction rate on homicide cases at trial of 72.6%. That's simply not "about 90%", as Krasner had claimed.

But up at the podium, Krasner was giving another speech.

He accused me of equating the conviction rate on "turnstile jumping" with the conviction rate on homicides, and he added that I was "the only one in the room who believes that."

"You left out 48 cases," I told Krasner, but he was already on to the next reporter.

"Excuse me, sir, your turn is over," he said.

Today's press conference was called so that Krasner, Outlaw and Kenney could cry crocodile tears over one of the latest victims of gun violence. Tiffany Fletcher, 41, a mother of three, came to work as a pool maintenance employee this summer at the Mill Creek Recreation Center and agreed to stay on to work with neighborhood kids.

Around 1 p.m. Friday, Fletcher was caught in a shoot-out outside the rec center between armed and dangerous teenagers. She was killed by a stray bullet. A 14 year-old has been charged with murder, Krasner announced at his press conference today.

Krasner, of course, will tell you that his policies have nothing to do with the latest round of gun violence that saw 35 people shot over the weekend, nine of whom died as our latest murder victims.

Would it surprise you to learn that on July 17th, the 14 year-old suspect who was charged with murder in the rec center case was previously arrested for a violent robbery and attempted carjacking? And that when the case went to court, a judge let the suspect go free?

"I don't know how much of a fight the D.A. put up over that one," a police source said.

But out of the spotlight of the TV cameras, Krasner's brief attempt at transparency with Big Trial was over for the day.

Neither Krasner nor a spokesperson for the D.A.'s office bothered to respond to a request for comment.

By Ralph Cipriano
for BigTrial.net

For District Attorney Larry Krasner, it was time for some well-deserved comeuppance after his smug arrogance and lawless nature finally caught up with him.

On Monday, an angry federal judge, U.S. District Court Judge Mitchell Goldberg, officially sanctioned the D.A.'s office for an "egregious" and "exceptional" lack of candor, which in legal speak means that the judge got pissed after he caught three of Krasner's top supervisors repeatedly lying to him.

Then, the federal judge ordered Krasner to personally apologize in writing to a crime victim, as well as three of her family members, for not informing her and them -- as required by law -- that Krasner had intervened in the case and was conspiring with defense lawyers to let the vicious killer of her parents off death row.

As D.A., Krasner a former career criminal defense lawyer, has routinely placed the welfare of criminals above the rights of crime victims, whom he often callously ignores in his progressive crusade to empty the jails. At issue with Judge Goldberg was the case of Robert Wharton, who, with a co-defendant, was convicted in 1984 of strangling and drowning to death a minister's son and his wife.

After Wharton and his co-defendant got through brutally murdering the couple and ransacking their home, they turned off the heat in the dead of winter and left the couple's infant daughter, then 7-months old, alone to freeze to death. Before they left, the killers even stole the infant's crib. This is the crime victim, now 38, whom Krasner had intentionally snubbed.

Then, on Tuesday, an angry state House of Representatives decided, in a massive 162-38 vote, to hold Krasner in contempt for failing to honor a subpoena issued by a house committee that's investigating whether to impeach Krasner.

The vote by the Republican dominated legislature, according to the Inquirer and KYW, included 51 Democrats across the state, as well as 10 Democrats from Philadelphia, all of whom crossed the aisle to publicly censure Lawless Larry.

The pro-Krasner Inquirer described the state House of Representatives' vote to hold Krasner in contempt as "a highly unusual move that even the measure’s sponsor told House colleagues he’d never seen before."

State Rep. John Lawrence, a Republican who represents parts of Chester and Lancaster counties and is the chairman of the house select committee investigating Krasner, told the newspaper that the DA had “willfully neglected” the subpoena and was treating it like “a worthless piece of paper.”

“What is at issue today is nothing less than the institutional authority” of the legislative body, an outraged Lawrence told the Inquirer. According to the pro-Krasner newspaper, the penalties for being in contempt of the legislature include jail.

Holy Progressive Nightmare! But, as many of us know, that's where Krasner belongs.

On top of that, two Philadelphia Democrats were actually quoted in the newspaper I refer to as The Daily Democrat as slamming Krasner.

“At the end of the day, the question was: ‘Did he not comply with the subpoena, and is he in contempt?” said State Rep. Mary Isaacson, a Democrat who represents Center City, Northern Liberties, and Fishtown told the Inquirer. “And the answer is yes.”

Jared Solomon, another Democrat from Northeast Philadelphia, made what the Inquirer described as a "pointed comparison." Solomon told the newspaper that Krasner’s defiance the law was “exactly the same” as that of Steve Bannon, the longtime Donald Trump confidante who was convicted of contempt of Congress for failing to comply with subpoenas in its investigation of the Jan. 6th riot at the U.S. Capitol.

“It’s about the constitutional powers that we as an institution have, and whether the law is to be respected or not,” Solomon the Philadelphia Democrat told the newspaper.

So even Democratic elected officials are publicly turning on Krasner.

Our lawless D.A. kicked off his week by holding a joint press-conference on Monday with the mayor and police commissioner at the Mathematics, Civics and Sciences Charter School on North Broad Street.

This was another display of arrogance by Krasner, allegedly the city's top law enforcement officer.

Why?

Because charter schools are financed by city taxpayers. And Krasner is a habitual tax deadbeat who, on the day he held the press conference at the charter school, owed the city back taxes of $80,451.90.

It's an ongoing scandal that no reporter in the city to date has had the balls to confront Krasner about.

In the subpoena that state legislators served on Krasner, they asked for the "complete case file" and records of the corrupt grand jury proceedings in the prosecution of former Philadelphia Police Officer Ryan Pownall.

It's a case where state Supreme Court Justice Kevin Dougherty has written in a concurring opinion that was “driven by a win-at-all-cost office culture” that "treats police officers differently than other criminal defendants."

"This is the antithesis of what the law expects of a prosecutor," Dougherty wrote, adding that under the law, a prosecutor is supposed to be a "minister of justice."

In his concurring opinion, Justice Dougherty wrote that Krasner's office neglected to inform the grand jury about the relevant case law involving justifiable use of force by a police officer so it would produce a "slanted" grand jury report that Krasner could feed to the media. So they would tar and feather Pownall before he goes on trial this fall.

This is another scandal that not one reporter in the city has had the balls to confront Krasner about.

But despite the temerity of the local media, the tide may be turning against Krasner.

Democrats in the state legislature aren't the only ones turning on Krasner. At the D.A.'s press conference held on Monday, no sitting member of the City Council, nor any of the four council members who just resigned to run for mayor, dared to show up beside Krasner in front of a roomful of reporters and TV cameras.

And during the press conference, while Krasner was taking questions, a visibly agitated Mayor Kenney and his security detail was seen hastily exiting the press conference while Krasner was still talking.

Apparently the mayor wanted to beat it before any reporter could ask him questions about either the D.A. or the latest round of senseless Philadelphia murders.

And for a fat man, Kenney was moving pretty fast as he hit the exits.

A sure sign that Krasner is in trouble is that at 7:30 tonight at Mother Bethel AME Church at 419 S. 6th Street, the city's Black Clergy, the ACLU of Pennsylvania and the Philadelphia Federation of Teachers are holding a joint rally.

According to a notice sent out by the Lawerence Krasner for District Attorney committee, the rally is being held to "support Larry" against the forces of "fascism" who are trying to "overturn the election because they don't like our reform policies."

Wait till those 51 Democrats in the state house of representatives find out that in voting to hold Krasner in contempt, they're a bunch of fascists!

In the case of the Commonwealth v. Wharton, the D.A.'s office under Larry Krasner was trying to convince Judge Goldberg to let Robert Wharton off death row. In doing so, the D.A.'s office claimed that Wharton the convicted killer had supposedly rehabilitated himself while in prison.

In making that argument, however, the three supervisors in the D.A.'s office neglected to tell the judge that in 1986, the supposedly rehabilitated Wharton had tried to escape a courtroom in City Hall, and was only stopped after he was shot twice by a sheriff's deputy.

The D.A.'s office also neglected to inform Judge Goldberg about the six times that Wharton had been disciplined in prison, twice after he was caught with pieces of a metal antenna that Wharton had fashioned into a key to unlock his handcuffs.

The D.A.'s office also misled the judge into believing that they had gotten around to notifying the only surviving member of the murder victims, as well as for family, and that nobody supposedly objected to getting Robert Wharton off death row.

In delivering his sanctions on the D.A.'s office, Judge Goldberg noted that during a two-hour hearing, he asked David Rudovsky, a longtime Krasner ally who was representing the three supervisors, for an explanation as to why the D.A.'s office, after decades of defending the death penalty conviction of Robert Wharton, was suddenly reversing course.

And, the judge noted in his memorandum opinion, Rudovsky replied, "We don’t think any explanation is necessary . . . We are not bringing [the attorneys] in to explain anything.”

When asked if the public deserved an explanation for the turn-around, the judge noted, Rudovsky arrogantly replied, “Absolutely not.”

In his opinion, Judge Goldberg noted that in claiming that Wharton had rehabilitated himself in prison, none of the D.A.'s filings in the case "contained any mention of possibly the worst type of prison adjustment — a violent escape from City Hall in 1986 and subsequent escape conviction."

"The District Attorney’s Office continues to press that although it is a public, prosecuting office, a heightened duty of candor does not apply to its communications with the Court," the judge concluded.

And when the judge called the D.A.'s office on its lack of candor, "the District Attorney’s Office has steadfastly insisted that it has done nothing wrong, owes no explanation, and will provide none," the judge wrote.

Once again, the arrogance of Larry Krasner came back to bite him.

In sanctioning the D.A.'s office, Judge Goldberg spelled out the penalty for its lack of candor. He also directed the sanctions personally at Krasner:

"First, within thirty (30) days of the filing of this opinion, the District Attorney’s Office shall send separate written apologies to victim family members Tony Hart, Michael Allen, Patrice Carr, and to victim Lisa Hart-Newman for representing that it engaged in “communication with the victims’ family," the judge wrote.

"As the testimony of the two Law Division supervisors was that the District Attorney approved and implemented internal procedures that created the need for this sanction, and that the District Attorney had the sole, ultimate authority to direct that the misleading Notice of Concession be filed, the apologies shall come from the District Attorney, Lawrence Krasner, personally," the judge wrote.

"Copies of the apologies shall be filed with the Court."

During the two-hour hearing where Judge Goldberg grilled Krasner's top supervisors, one last act of hypocrisy in the D.A.'s office was revealed.

It happened when Nancy Winkelman, the supervisor of the D.A.'s law division, gave a speech to the judge about being a woman of integrity.

"My professional reputation is extraordinarily important to me," Deputy District Attorney Winkelman told Judge Goldberg.

"My integrity, my reputation, my candor, my ethics have never been questioned. And it's something I take very, very seriously," she told the judge, adding that she was "stunned" to learn that Goldberg had dared to question her integrity.

But this self-proclaimed woman of integrity, who gets paid $176,171 a year, was subsequently revealed to be using a phony address to get around the City Charter's residency requirement.

Twice last year, Winkelman declared on campaign finance reports that she lives in a rundown rental property featuring one and two-bedroom apartments with a coffin in front at 650 S. 51st Street in West Philadelphia.

But Winkelman, who, as an employee of the D.A.'s office since 2018, is required by the city charter to live in Philadelphia, really lives in a house on a scenic lake in scenic Medford Lakes, N.J.

She's one of three top supervisors in Krasner's office who earn more than $500,000 but have been publicly outed by Big Trial for being carpetbaggers flagrantly violating the residency requirement.

When I tried to ask Krasner about it on Aug. 29th, Krasner abruptly ended his press conference and ran away from me past a bunch of bewildered invited guests, including City Council Member Kendra Brooks, who were left to wonder what was going on.

But Krasner couldn't run away from Judge Goldberg. And now he can't run away from that subpoena from the state House of Representatives.

A subpoena that will expose the egregious prosecutorial misconduct in the case of Ryan Pownall, where Krasner in secret tampered with the evidence and the law presented to a grand jury so he could falsely indict a cop for murder.

It's evidence of egregious prosecutorial misconduct that may be presented at an impeachment trial in the state Senate. That's another proceeding that Krasner won't be able to run away from.

By Ralph Cipriano

for BigTrial.net

Twitter fans were the first to discover that Police Commissioner Danielle Outlaw was allegedly slugging it out with Deputy Police Commissioner Christine Coulter.

On Sept. 8th, reporter Steve Keeley of Fox 29 initially tweeted that the two top cops had squared off. And that after an "argument/disagreement over handling of a shooting incident, Coulter resigned," Keeley tweeted, and she was supposedly packing up her office.

That same day, Sharrie Williams, a news anchor at 6ABC quoting sources, tweeted that Coulter "expressed disappointment" that she was being demoted to chief inspector and "is considering retiring."

Later that day, however, Coulter told Keely, "I did not resign. No decision has been made yet."

Coulter, who joined the police department in 1988, became the first woman to lead the department when she assumed the role of acting police commissioner in August 2019, after the sudden resignation of former P.C. Richard Ross.

Four months later, Coulter returned to her duties as deputy police commissioner after Mayor Kenney hired Outlaw in December 2019 to be the new P.C. But if you believe Twitter, and who doesn't, the two don't get along.

A week after the alleged blow-up between Outlaw and Coulter, Sgt. Eric Gripp, a police department spokesperson, said that Christine Coulter has not resigned or been demoted. And that Coulter continues to serve the department as deputy police commissioner of organizational services.

Gripp also said he has heard but can't confirm or deny any of the rumors that Coulter hung onto her title as deputy police commissioner after reported interventions on her behalf from [a] Mayor Jim Kenney; [b] Managing Director Tumar Alexander and [c] unspecified City Council members.

Alexander did not respond to a request for comment. Neither did a spokesperson for Mayor Kenney.

Joe Grace, a spokesperson for City Council President Darrell Clarke, said he was unaware of any intervention by any City Council members on Coulter's behalf.

"I haven't heard that," Grace said.

The only rumor that Sgt. Gripp hadn't heard was the one that I started, that shortly before her death, which suspiciously also occurred on Sept. 8th, that the late Queen Elizabeth had personally intervened on Coulter's behalf.

Outlaw has had a history of not getting along with her deputy commissioners. Before she even got to town, she reportedly had then-Managing Director Brian Abernathy fire Deputy Police Commissioner Joe Sullivan.

Since she's been here, she's gotten rid of former Deputy Commissioner Dennis Wilson, First Deputy Commissioner Melvin Singleton, and Deputy Commissioner Ben Naish.

Her latest clash with Deputy Commissioner Christine Coulter has prompted all kinds of rumors that haven't been confirmed. But a motion filed yesterday in U.S. District Court may shed some light on why Coulter and Outlaw aren't getting along.

The "plaintiff's motion for severe sanctions after second violation of the court's order and dissemination of sealed depositions" was filed by former homicide detective Derrick Jacobs, who is suing the city of Philadelphia, Outlaw and the Police Department, alleging violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

In his lawsuit, Jacobs contends that the city failed to pay him overtime for hours worked while on "on call status," and that in not paying him, the defendants were retaliating against Jacobs because he was a whistleblower. The lawsuit names as defendants, the city, the Police Department, Wilson and Coulter.

During his lawsuit against the city, Jacobs, acting as his own attorney, deposed former deputy Police Commissioner Dennis Wilson, as well as Deputy Police Commissioner Christine Coulter.

In an April 4th videotaped deposition in the case of Derrick Jacobs v. City of Philadelphia et al in U.S. District Court, Wilson spoke out for the first time about the teargassing of protesters on the Vine Street Expressway on June 1, 2020 during the George Floyd riots.

The official story, as promulgated at a joint press conference held in 2020 by Kenney and Outlaw, is that the decision to deploy tear gas during the George Floyd riots against protesters who were illegally blocking the highway during rush hour was made solely by Wilson.

At the press conference, then Deputy Police Commissioner Wilson came to the podium and took the entire blame for the teargassing.

"I didn't call the commissioner, I gave the approval," Wilson said. "And it was me and me alone."

Wilson then announced that for "violating the rules of engagement and the commissioner's trust, I'm going to take a voluntary demotion" to chief inspector.

"Falling on the sword," was how Outlaw characterized it at the press conference before she dispatched Wilson with a condescending pat on the back.

So why did Wilson take the fall, along with a voluntary demotion to chief inspector, and an annual pay cut of $26,000, from $206,000 down to $180,000?

Because, as Big Trial has previously reported, according to police sources, Wilson had been told that District Attorney Krasner was planning to arrest him. And if convicted, under Pennsylvania law, Wilson stood to not only lose his pension, but also a DROP bonus of some $800,000.

In his deposition with Jacobs, Wilson did not admit that he had lied at the press conference. But he did change his story.

"Everyone knew that decision was going to be made," Wilson testified about the use of tear gas. Wilson added that "everybody" included the police commissioner, whom he had just had a cell phone conversation with "immediately before" the tear gas was dropped.

"And I took a voluntary demotion when the heat, I guess, got too much for the city," Wilson said.

At the 2020 press conference Wilson said he was taking a voluntary demotion because he "didn't call the commissioner" to get her final approval to drop tear gas.

But in his deposition with Jacobs, Wilson testified that he did speak to Outlaw via cell phone shortly before the tear gas was deployed.

"How long before you approved the use of tear gas, were you in communication with Police Commissioner Outlaw?" Jacobs asked.

"Immediately before," Wilson replied, "but I'm not exactly sure of the time."

Wilson's deposition made headlines on Big Trial on May 2nd. A day later, on May 3rd, the city filed a motion for a protective order prohibiting the parties in Jacobs's lawsuit from "disseminating" deposition testimony to any third party who was not involved in the case.

At a June 7th hearing, at which Jacobs was present, Jacobs writes, "the defendants' counsel strenuously pursued the sealing of the depositions . . . to prevent Ralph Cipriano and website bigtrial.net from exposing public corruption."

In motions filed in court, the city solicitor's office contended that excerpts from Wilson's deposition testimony published on big trial.net were allegedly used to "harass, annoy and/or intimidate" former deputy police commissioner Wilson.

The city solicitor's office similarly argued that if Coulter's deposition was excerpted on bigtrial.net, it would expose Coulter to"harassment and undue distress."

A month later, on June 10th, Judge Joel Slomsky bought the argument, and granted the city's motion for a protective order that effectively sealed depositions in the case.

During his depositions of Wilson and Coulter, Jacobs writes in his latest motion, "both defendants were asked during depositions why was Detective Jacobs disciplined." And, Jacobs added, "Both defendants could not provide an answer as to why Detective Jacobs was disciplined."

On Sept. 1st, Jacobs filed a motion to unseal the depositions of both Coulter and Wilson, alleging that the motion was filed "due to the defendants's effort [counsel] to cover up public corruption."

In his latest motion, Jacobs asserts that the city violated the judge's order not to disseminate Coulter's deposition by sharing it with top city officials, including Outlaw.

"Upon information and belief, due to the information contained in the plaintiff's filings, counsel for the defendants disseminated the deposition testimony of defendant Christine Coulter to non-parties" to the lawsuit that included Mayor Kenney, Police Commissioner Outlaw, and District Attorney Krasner, "in violation of the court's order."

"Upon information and belief," Jacobs stated, Outlaw "confronted defendant Christine Coulter regarding her 'truthful' and under oath 'deposition testimony,' which the defendants requested to be sealed."

"Upon information and belief, after the confrontation," Jacobs writes, "an ongoing feud (for lack of a better word) developed between Coulter and Outlaw, which lead to Outlaw giving Coulter the options of demotion or resignation, on or about Sept. 7th," which Jacobs writes, was six days after Jacobs filed a motion to unseal the depositions of Coulter and Wilson.

According to Jacobs, Outlaw was provided with the deposition so that she would "retaliate against Coulter for her truthful testimony provided under oath" with Jacobs.

A spokesperson for the Police Department declined to comment on the allegations made by Jacobs.

"The Police Department can't comment on ongoing litigation," Sgt. Gripp responded.

By Ralph Cipriano
for BigTrial.net

The embattled district attorney of Philadelphia today turned a press conference at the D.A.'s office into a political rally against the members of the state House of Representatives who just voted to hold him in contempt for ignoring a subpoena.

With a blow up of the preamble to the U.S. Constitution and a blindfolded Lady Justice behind him as a backdrop, Krasner talked about "the necessity of protecting Philadelphia's democracy" against a list of enemies, real and imagined.

According to Krasner, the enemies of democracy who are trying to impeach him and overturn free elections everywhere include not only the state legislators who voted 162-38 against Krasner -- including 51 Democrats -- but also past Republican presidents such as Donald Trump and Richard Nixon, the neo-Fascist Proud Boys as well as the anti-government militia known as the Oath Keepers.

While he was on his political soapbox, Krasner also trashed Ryan Pownall, a former police officer whom the D.A. has indicted for murder. In publicly hanging Pownall out to dry, Krasner divulged what will surely be inadmissible evidence when the former cop goes on trial in November. But as Krasner has previously demonstrated, a cop's civil rights means nothing to him.

In the Pownall case, a state Supreme Court Justice, Kevin Dougherty, has publicly charged Krasner with abusing the grand jury process by withholding relevant case law from grand jurors about what constitutes justifiable use of force by a police officer.

Why did Krasner do that? According to what state Supreme Court Justice Dougherty wrote in a concurring opinion, Krasner did it so that the grand jury, purposely kept ignorant of the law, would produce a "tainted" grand jury report that Krasner could feed to the media, so they would tar and feather defendant Pownall before he goes on trial.

Krasner's latest assault on the civil rights of a police officer came just days after a Common Pleas Court judge admonished Jane Roh, Krasner's spokesperson, for tweeting about an ongoing case involving another former police officer indicted by Krasner, Eric Ruch Jr., currently on trial for murder.

Last week, The Philadelphia Inquirer reported that Common Pleas Court Judge Barbara McDermott "grew irate" when she learned that Roh had tweeted about the Ruch case, including a report that the city had agreed to pay $1.2 million to the widow of the suspect who was shot to death by Ruch.

According to the Inquirer, McDermott told Roh, “I will warn you, ma’am. You have heard me.” According to the Inquirer, the judge advised Roh that she had the power to hold people in contempt of court if Roh didn't stop tweeting about the case.

McDermott is also the judge in the Pownall case. And wait till she hears what Krasner said today, which far outweighs what Roh did to undermine a defendant's constitutional rights.

At today's press conference, Krasner complained that the select committee in the state House of Representatives that's trying to impeach him demanded in a subpoena that he give up "secret grand jury records in a particular case."

"Out of the 35,000 or so cases we do a year they wanted the contents of a file for one case," Krasner said.

"Guess which one?" the D.A. said. "It would be a case in which a police officer is charged with murder for twice shooting in the back a man who was running away and who was unarmed at the time he was shot," Krasner said, giving his twisted version of the facts of the case.

And then Krasner made the mistake of divulging his account of a second officer-involved shooting that Pownall was involved in, details that lawyers familiar with the case say will clearly constitute inadmissible evidence when Pownall goes on trial.

"This same officer previously and in uniform had shot another man in the back and paralyzed him," Krasner said. "That is the only case that this committee wants to get in the middle of and they know it's going to trial in November."

At the end of Krasner's press conference, I asked Krasner what he had to say in response to the allegations that state Supreme Court Justice Dougherty had publicly made against him in a concurring opinion.

As I previously mentioned, the state Supreme Court justice had charged Krasner with abusing the grand jury process and withholding relevant case law that would have acquitted the defendant, so that the grand jurors would produce a tainted report that Krasner could feed to a gullible news media.

Here, Krasner got pissed at me while I was asking my question.

"I'm sure you can put that speech in your article," he snapped, confirming once again what I've been told by sources, that Krasner is bigtrial.net's most loyal reader.

Then, Krasner got around to answering my question.

"My response to that is we are under strict instructions from the judge in that case not to talk about the case, and we will not be doing it until it is over," Krasner said.

Here, the D.A. in broad daylight was admitting that he wasn't supposed to talk about the Pownall case right after he had just trashed the former police officer.

But Krasner wasn't the only speaker at his press conference who trashed Pownall.

The Rev. Andrea Harrington of the Whosoever Metropolitan Community Church of Philadelphia began her remarks by condemning former President Trump for taking classified documents home with him.

"No one" will do anything about Trump, Harrington complained. "But the man who decides to seek justice for that man shot in his back and paralyzed by a police officer, oh he's horrible, get rid of him," Harrington said, referring to D.A. Krasner.

Trampling on a police officer's constitutional rights is nothing new for Krasner.

Last November, the state Commonwealth Court ruled that a "Do Not Call" list of allegedly tainted cops compiled by the D.A.'s office -- a list that would prohibit those cops from testifying in court -- was unconstitutional.

Why? Because the list, subsequently published in the Inquirer, amounted to a "black list," the court stated. Why? Because it did not afford the accused cops due process where they could contest the charges, and have a chance to clear their names.

And for Krasner, pissing off judges is nothing new either. Last week, U.S. District Court Judge Mitchell Goldberg officially sanctioned the D.A.'s office for an "egregious" and "exceptional" lack of candor. The judge got angry after he caught two of Krasner's top supervisors repeatedly lying to him.

As part of his sanctions, the federal judge ordered Krasner to personally apologize in writing to a crime victim, as well as three of her family members. Why? Because Krasner's office neglected to inform them -- as required by law -- that Krasner had intervened in the case and was conspiring with defense lawyers to let the vicious killer of the crime victim's parents off death row.

While Krasner was on his soapbox today, he complained about the societal forces driving violent crime in the city, which he said included the state legislature in Harrisburg, for not fully funding Philadelphia public schools.

That gave me a chance to ask Krasner about the back taxes he owes on the former Princeton Club, located at 1221-23 Locust Street, which means that Krasner is also personally guilty of not fully funding Philadelphia public schools.

As he often does, Krasner, a habitual tax deadbeat, used a technicality to lie to reporters at the press conference.

"OK, that's absolutely false," Krasner said about my statement that according to city tax records posted online, he owes the city of Philadelphia $77,933.66 in back taxes.

"I owe the city of Philadelphia absolutely nothing," Krasner contended. "That is completely incorrect."

According to Krasner's most recent statement of financial interest, however, filed on May 2, 2022, the D.A. has a 40% ownership stake in Tiger Building LP, which technically owns the former Princeton Club, with an estimated value of $3.8 million.

So, technically it's the Tiger Building LP, of which Krasner has a 40% stake in, that owes back taxes of $77,933.66.

That's Larry Krasner, always looking for a loophole to slither through.

But that's not the full story.

Because on his May 2, 2022 statement of financial interest where Krasner listed his 40% stake in Tiger Building LP, the D.A. was also required to list his personal debts.

So on his statement of financial interest the D.A. listed among his creditors -- you guessed it -- the city of Philadelphia!

That's something Krasner couldn't fess up to today in front of a roomful of reporters.

D.A. Krasner cuts off questions about alleged triple murderer

By Ralph Cipriano
for BigTrial.net

On the night of Dec. 28, 2020, Ebony Kitchen got involved in a physical altercation out in the street with a woman and a man.

What happened next was caught on surveillance video outside a smoke shop on the 5800 block of Rising Sun Avenue.

According to police, Savion Perez, who wasn't involved in the fight, went up to the 24 year-old Kitchen and shot her point-blank in the head, killing her.

On April 2, 2021, police arrested Perez, 23, of the Juniata section of Philadelphia, and charged him with murder, conspiracy, two gun charges, and reckless endangerment. The police also arrested three co-defendants and charged them each with seven counts, including murder, conspiracy, aggravated assault, and reckless endangerment.

The next stage of the criminal justice process involved the defendants showing up at a preliminary hearing, where a judge would decide whether the D.A.'s office had enough evidence to bind them over for trial. But after a couple of continuances in court, on July 21, 2021, when a witness failed to appear again, Judge James DeLeon dismissed all charges against all four defendants for a lack of prosecution.

What happened next has baffled homicide cops and former prosecutors who reviewed the case.

The D.A.'s office wound up refiling the charges against all three co-defendants, as is customary in murder cases whenever a judge at a preliminary hearing tosses the charges due to a lack of evidence. But in this murder case, the D.A.'s office failed to take the usual step of recharging the alleged shooter.

Recharging Perez would have kept him in jail while the cops went out hunting for witnesses, so that another judge at another preliminary hearing could hold Perez over for trial on murder charges.

But since the D.A.'s office didn't take that usual step of recharging him, Savion Perez went free.

And what did Savion Perez do with his newfound freedom? According to the cops and the D.A.'s office, he went out and allegedly committed two more murders. Perez's lawyer, Richard Shore, declined comment.

Let's Make A Deal

A cop who was familiar with the case said he didn't understand why the D.A.'s office didn't simply refile the charges against Perez. Or talk one of the three co-defendants into flipping, and testifying against Perez.

A seasoned former prosecutor who sought anonymity cautioned that without examining the case file, it was impossible to say with certainty whether Savion Perez could have been successfully prosecuted for murder. Even with a surveillance video as evidence.

However, the prosecutor did say what he would have done if confronted with such a situation. He would have basically morphed into Monty Hall, the late host on the old Let's Make A Deal show.

"The bottom line is this, I would have cut a deal with one of the three co-defendants, and gotten them to flip" and testify against Perez, the former prosecutor said.

But striking a deal to get a co-defendant to flip, the former prosecutor said, "would have required a person who knows what they're doing, and somebody who cares."

At a press conference yesterday at the D.A.'s office, I attempted to ask Joanne Pescatore, Larry Krasner's head of homicide, what happened with Perez.

But her boss, D.A. Krasner, now faced with possible impeachment from the state legislature, was employing some new tricks in his campaign to keep reporters from asking him tough questions that he doesn't want to answer.

Larry The SchoolMarm

Krasner's latest ploy to dodge questions from the media was to introduce a guest speaker at his press conference. Father Gregory Boyle is a Los Angeles priest who was visiting the city as a guest of the D.A.'s office. He's the founder of Homeboy Industries, a nonprofit in L.A. that works to rehabilitate former gang members.

At his press conference, Krasner stated that before he would take questions from Philadelphia's docile media, he wanted to announce that he would only entertain questions about the priest's work in L.A. or some specific gun crimes in Philly that the D.A. had just discussed in his latest update on gun crimes.

"I want to be clear," Krasner said, that he would only answer "questions specific to any of the cases I have raised about gun violence, or questions with reference to Homeboy Industries and Father Boyle."

"We will go in those two steps and I will call on reporters who have an interest in those two topics," the prissy Krasner lectured the reporters.

I proceeded to ask Pescatore about the release of Savion Perez, and why he wasn't recharged with the murder of Ebony Kitchen. Pescatore, I noted, had just signed off on two new murder warrants against Perez, who was back in custody.

Krasner immediately tried to shut down that line of questioning in a tiresome, schoolmarmish way.

Someone needs to tell our reform D.A., who once promised to be the most transparent Philly D.A. ever, that if you're calling a press conference, you're basically opening yourself up to all kinds of questions from all kinds of reporters. You're inviting chaos, and a free exchange that's known as freedom of speech, freedom of the press and democracy in action.

It's badly needed in a city that for the past two years has been setting all-time records for shootings, murders and carjackings. At a time when Krasner's version of alleged criminal justice reform, which basically involves placing the welfare of criminals above the rights of crime victims while imperiling the rest of us, is under fire from the state legislature.

But rules are rules, and at his press conference, Larry Krasner was being a stickler.

"These shootings, sir," Krasner insisted. He admonished me for not asking about the "shootings that we've discussed" at his press conference.

When I persisted I wanted to know about Savion Perez, Krasner proceeded to opine at the microphone.

"Please, please, let's play by the rules for a change," Krasner continued to lecture me. "If you don't," he said, "then you're already violating the rules."

What rules?

As I told Krasner, "You change the rules every week."

At Krasner's last press conference, when it came time for the weekly q and a with the media, individual reporters spoke up and asked the D.A. many questions about many subjects, without going through the protocol of having to wait for Krasner to call on them by name.

The D.A. Office's Official Rules For Press Conferences

Some background is necessary here. When Krasner had me escorted out of one of his press conferences last month for asking a question that he didn't want to answer, I engaged Paula Knudsen Burke to represent me on behalf of the Pennsylvania chapter of the Reporters Committee For Freedom Of The Press.

Knudsen Burke contacted Krasner on my behalf, to let him know that the courts have consistently ruled that it's unconstitutional to discriminate against a reporter simply because Krasner doesn't like what I write about him on Big Trial.

On July 14th, Knudsen Burke filed a right-to-know request with the D.A.'s office asking to see a copy of the official office rules and policies regarding the D.A.'s press conferences, specifically, any records concerning "any criteria or direction on exclusion of news media members."

On Aug. 22nd, after filing for a 30-day extension, John Niemtzow, the D.A.'s open records officer, finally responded to Knudsen Burke's request.

And here's what he had to say:

The DAO was unable to locate any written policies, directives or guidelines from January 1, 2022, through July 14, 2022, discussing which members of the news media are included or excluded from, inter alia, press conferences, briefings, or media advisories, or any criteria concerning invitations to the press to these functions . . .

Moreover, the DAO is not required to generate records in response to [right-to-know] requests. See 65 P.S. § 67.705 (“[A]n agency shall not be required to create a record which does not currently exist”).

So here was the D.A.'s open records officer stating for the record that at the D.A.'s office, there simply are no rules for press conferences.

In addition to filing her right-to-know request, Knudsen Burke had also tried numerous times to seek comment from Krasner and/or Jane Roh, his official spokesperson, about his official office rules for press conferences, only to be stonewalled.

So on Sept. 9th, Knudsen Burke wrote Krasner:

Given both your lack of response, and Mr. Niemtzow’s August 22 letter, it is clear that there are no “rules” or procedures governing access to press conferences held by your office.

Therefore, we presume there will be no future incidents such as the one that occurred on August 8, 2022 when Mr. Cipriano was physically escorted from a District Attorney press conference for failing to follow non-existent “rules.”

Somebody who's familiar with the U.S. Constitution must have had a talk with D.A. Krasner. Because he's no longer ordering his security officers to evict me from press conferences.

And he's no longer running away from me so he won't have to answer my questions -- something he has done five times in the past three months.

Instead, Krasner is now calling on me regularly at press conferences.

OK, that's progress. But it still doesn't mean that Krasner wants to answer any tough questions.

The Head of Homicide Speaks

While Krasner was admonishing me yesterday for not following his non-existent rules for press conferences, Joanne Pescatore, Krasner's head of homicide, bravely spoke up.

"I can answer that," she said about my question about Savion Perez.

"I approved both those cases," she said, referring to the two new arrest warrants for murder filed against Perez. "What's your question?" she asked.

So I proceeded to ask Pescatore why the D.A.'s office had recharged the three co-defendants for murder and conspiracy in the murder of Ebony Kitchen, but why they had failed to recharge the alleged shooter in the case, Mr. Savion Perez.

"Those three co-defendants," Pescatore noted, "are going to trial next month in November." So, she stated, "I cannot use anything they told me with regard to the actual shooter in the case."

Unless she struck a deal with one of those co-defendants to flip, and testify against Perez.

Pescatore blamed the decision not to recharge Perez and his subsequent release on a witness who repeatedly failed to show up in court.

"The witness in the case moved to Texas," she said. "We were still trying to find him. He did not appear at multiple preliminary hearings. It's not easy to get somebody in from another state."

When I pressed her on the decision to not recharge Perez, she said, "I am resurrecting that case once I can go forward with a preliminary hearing. I can't just recharge. I need to make sure I can make out the case."

As in having a witness ready to identify Perez in court as the shooter.

"If I couldn't find the guy yesterday, I need to know where he is so I can subpoena him with a new date" to show up in court, Pescatore said. "So that's the way it is."

In the meantime, I pointed out to Pescatore that according to the cops as well as her office, Savion Perez had gone out and committed two new murders.

"I understand," she replied.

Meanwhile, Larry Krasner had seen enough.

"That's not a question," he said about the two new murders that Perez had allegedly committed.

Then Krasner decided to shut down the discussion.

"Alright we will move on," he said, before going on to taking questions from other reporters that he was calling on.

Madelaine Wright, a general assignment reporter for CBS3, wanted to ask Krasner about an incident this weekend that made national headlines. Some 100 youths descended on a WaWa store on Roosevelt Boulevard and ransacked the place, and one of the invaders celebrated by twerking.

A video of the incident had gone viral, but Larry Krasner didn't want to talk about twerking or ransacking the WaWa.

"We're not gonna take general questions about other stuff today," Krasner said. "Theres plenty of stuff to talk about on another day."

When the reporter protested, Krasner said, "Well, that is not a topic for today. We'll be happy to address it at another forum but we're not going to disrespect the people who have come here from Los Angeles."

Krasner's decision not to discuss the WaWa invasion, the sanctimonious D.A. told Wright, was done "out of respect for people who have come a long way to spend two days going around the city" to meet with people and talk about how gang members are getting rehabilitated in L.A.

While back in Philadelphia, people are getting shot, murdered and carjacked in historic numbers.

Strike 1 For Savion Perez

The murder of Ebony Kitchen was big news on TV.

"About two minutes before being shot and killed, [Kitchen] was involved in a physical altercation with a female and a male," Chief Inspector Scott Small told 6ABC on Dec. 29, 2020.

"Then, about two minutes later, another male who was not involved in the initial altercation walked up, and he clearly points a gun at her head, face-area, and fires from just a few feet away," Small said.

Police told 6ABC that business surveillance systems and real-time crime cameras captured the murder on film. The police gathered other evidence.

"We found eight spent shell casings on the highway," Small told 6ABC. "Most of these shell casings were a few inches, some were just a few feet, from where the victim was laying on the street and pronounced dead."

At the time, police said, while the suspect was still at large, they had witnesses who could presumably identify him.

The victim, just 24, of the Lawncrest section of the city, was an employee of the city school district who delivered food to kids.

"The last thing she said to me at 5 o'clock was: 'I love you Mom,' before she left out my door," the victim's mother, Angela Sears, in a subsequent interview, told 6ABC.

Savion Perez On The Loose

On May 18th of this year, police in Upper Southhampton PD conducted a traffic stop on a two-door black Ford F-150 pickup bearing a counterfeit temporary New Jersey registration.

Inside, the police found Savion Perez carrying a fully loaded Glock 19 9 mm handgun under the driver's seat, as well as a 30 round fully-loaded extended magazine in the glove compartment. The gun, police said, had two different serial numbers on the slide and frame, but no registered gun owner.

The passenger's side window on Perez's truck was shattered and police found three spent shell casings on the floorboard of the truck. The driver, the police noted, was uncooperative. After he was charged with illegally carrying a gun, Perez was released on bail.

He subsequently failed to show up for court.

Strike 2

Just 11 days later, at 9:18 p.m. on May 29th, police responded to a radio call report of a shooting at 3065 N. Lawrence Street in South Philadelphia. They found an unresponsive male victim suffering from multiple gunshot wounds.

Edgardo Santiago 56, of 3063 N. Lawrence Street was transported by medics to Temple University Hospital where he was pronounced dead at 9:47 p.m.

A second victim, a 33 year-old Hispanic female, was transported by private vehicle to Temple University Hospital suffering from multiple gunshot wounds to her lower extremities. She was reported in stable condition.

At the crime scene, police found 31 9 mm fired cartridges, nine ballistic fragments and four ballistics projectiles.

For that crime, a warrant was issued for the arrest of Perez on nine charges that include murder, attempted murder, aggravated assault, reckless endangerment, and two gun charges.

Strike 3

On July 15th, police responded to a report of a shooting victim at 3500 Amber Street. They found 24 year-old Marc Santiago-Moyer dead.

On Aug. 31st, police arrested Savion Perez and charged him with seven counts, including murder, robbery, theft, and two gun charges.

But to date, Perez has still not been recharged with the murder of Ebony Kitchen.

By Ralph Cipriano
for BigTrial.net

We're here live at the Larry Krasner impeachment hearings.

And who do you think is supposedly planning to show up as a surprise guest?

You guessed it, the camera-hogging D.A. himself.

Krasner supposedly has scheduled a rally across the street from the Penn State building on 12th Street where the impeachment hearings will be held today and tomorrow, beginning at 10 a.m. today.

According to the cops, Krasner has asked for, and will receive, police protection when he takes the bullhorn and presumably starts rallying the troops against MAGA Republicans, Donald Trump, and the state Legislature, etc., all of whom are surely out to get him.

Krasner's usual plan is to blame everybody but himself for the historic gun violence in Philadelphia that's already topped 400 murders this year, plus more than 1,400 shootings and more than 1,000 carjackings.

9:17 a.m.

Reporters are filing into the hearing room. This place is loaded with cops, inside and out. Krasner's rally will supposedly begin at 9:30 a.m.

The D.A. took quite a beating yesterday. It began on Fox 29's Good Day Philadelphia when the usually genial host Mike Jerrick asked Krasner if he was thinking about resigning because his grand social experiment of emptying the jails isn't working out so well for the citizens of Philadelphia.

"It's working, it's working," Krasner insisted.

Jerrick then rattled off the body count, more than 1,000 murders to date in 2020 and 2021, and suggested that the frequently delusional Krasner had lost touch with reality.

On camera, Krasner cycled through his usual talking points, cooking up his own crime stats, and making apples to oranges comparisons of Philadelphia's jail sentences for gun crimes with bucolic places such as Lancaster County. And, of course, Krasner was railing against MAGA Republicans, whom he insists are behind the plot to impeach him.

Then, at a joint press conference on the mass shooting outside Roxborough High, with clueless Mayor Kenney and the police brass, Krasner seemed taken aback and for a change, publicity shy. He was the first public official to bolt the press conference, signaling that he'd had enough of the media for one day.

Kenney, of course was his usual self, blaming the state legislature for the proliferation of guns in the city he has presided over for the past seven years.

There's two things that Kenney could do, starting yesterday, to save lives in Philadelphia.

No. 1, he could fire his completely incompetent and totally in over-her-head police commissioner Danielle Outlaw, known fondly among her troops as MIA, as in Missing In Action.

I asked Kenney yesterday where Outlaw was. He didn't want to answer the question. But when Walt Perez, the 6ABC anchor and general assignment reporter, asked him the same question, Kenney said Outlaw's absence from the press conference was for "personal" reasons.

When I asked Kenney if he was considering replacing Outlaw, he looked at me directly and gave me a one-word answer: "No."

Why mess with success, right?

An indignant Tumar Alexander, the city's managing director, subsequently took the mike and explained that the PC was sick. And then he added, as some sort of rebuke to myself and Perez, "Isn't she allowed to be sick?"

Both Perez and I were immediately overcome with guilt pangs.

The second thing Kenney could do to save lives is to stand up in his bully pulpit and rail against Krasner on a daily basis for not enforcing the law. But Kenney, who has told people I know that he hates Krasner, is too much of a gutless coward to do that.

So Mayor McBarStool, as he is known, remains a complete bloated failure as the leader of our city, which remains in crisis.

9:42 a.m.

I just ventured outside the building to attend the big Krasner rally.

What a disappointment. There's some 30 to 40 activist types gathered across the street wearing T-shirts that say "Count Every Vote" and "Unite."

But no Kras!

"He's gonna stay hiding in his bunker," one cop suggested.

I replied that our PC was probably doing the same thing. But other cops suggested she was either vacationing in Europe or job-hunting out in California.

We're ten minutes away from the start of the impeachment hearing and there's still plenty of seats here at 4960 S. 12th Street.

10 a.m.

The hearing just began right on time.

State Rep. John Lawrence, the chairman of the houses select committee, is telling us that anybody who expects to hear "slanderous mud" tossed at the Philly D.A. will be disappointed.

"We will not be baited," he said, into the turning the hearings into a "pure political circus."

State Rep. Amen Brown has the floor.

"I'm here to represent the crime victims of Philadelphia," he said. Brown just related how he himself was shot in the back at age 14 by a repeat offender. And what it was like to see his own blood on the pavement and hearing his mother say, "Please save my baby."

He's talking about his own time in prison. Being one of six children. His mother a drug addict who didn't pay the bills. Living in a house with no heat. And rising out of poverty to become a self-made entrepreneur.

Now he's talking about a 100 year-old grandmother, who, because of the violence in her neighborhood and the drug dealers who live there, told Brown that for the past two years, she hasn't been able to sit out on her front porch.

"This is why I'm here today," Rep. Brown said.

10:20 a.m.

Ms. A, a resident of South Philadelphia, is the first witness. State Rep. Wendy Thomas is reading her testimony into the record.

Ms. A moved to Philly in 2018. In March of 2020, she was outside working out with friends when she got caught in a crossfire between gang members.

"I was hit with one of the bullets and shot in my chest," she said.

She was in the hospital for a week.

"The entire shooting, which happened in broad daylight, was caught on camera," she said. But no arrests were made, and the D.A.'s office did nothing to investigate the crime against her.

Her car has been broken into numerous times, and she's had enough of the crime here.

"I intend on leaving Philadelphia because I no longer feel safe here," she said.

10:25 a.m.

Karen McConnell is testifying on video about how her granddaughter, Jailene Holton, 21, was shot in the head and killed by Anthony Nelson. He's a guy who was expressing his anger over the unavailability of a pool table by shooting his gun off outside a bar.

Before he was accused of murder, Nelson was accused of rape. If he had been convicted in what looked like a slam dunk rape case, McConnell said, her granddaughter would still be alive.

But Krasner's poorly trained and inexperienced prosecutors have no idea what they're doing. So Nelson beat the rap in a case where the prosecution had some 90 incriminating texts as evidence against him.

"The Krasner office has failed us," McConnell said. "They're not doing their job."

Criminals are treated with "white gloves," she complained. While innocent people like her granddaughter pay the price for crime.

Jailene had a tough life, her grandmother said. She lost her mother when she was two years old. She was just coming into her own when she was murdered.

10:32 a.m.

Tiffany Flynn is testifying on video about her 19 year old daughter who was murdered last year in a grocery store parking lot in Olney.

"My daughter was shot three times, one time in the head," Flynn said. A video of the crime went viral.

The killers were three young men, she said. She thought she had an ID on one of the killers, and gave it to the cops. But a year later, she said, the cops have done nothing to solve the crime.

"I live less than five blocks away from where my daughter was murdered," she said. And criminals are getting bolder, she complained. They feel they can get away with anything.

10:38 a.m.

Malikah and Robert Womack are talking on video about the death of their daughter, who was stabbed to death by another woman. The parents rushed to the hospital when they got the bad news.

"She just had all these tubes in her," her mother said. A nurse told the mom, "I tried to wake her up but she wouldn't wake up."

Malikah talks about how she was kissing her daughter, who had two strokes while on life support. Doctors tried to save her life with brain surgery, but she didn't make it.

"I just dropped to the floor," she recalled when she got the news that her daughter was gone. "I was like dead weight."

"That was just the worst time of my life," Malikah said. But the detective on the case never got back to her.

"I don't know what happened to my child," she said.

The accused killer was in jail for a year. At the preliminary hearing, a witness didn't show.

A defense lawyer protested that the accused killer needed to go home to take care of her baby. But she also had an open gun case.

"They had no remorse for my side of the family," Malikah said. "Nothing."

When the accused killer was set free, nobody told Malikah about it.

"No one from the district attorney's office, even the ADA, didn't tell me," she said.

When the accused killer assaulted another person, Malikah called the ADA in charge of her daughter's case.

"How did this suspect obtain bail twice," she asked. She assaulted two people, killing one of them, and she's at home, Malikah asked again. How is that possible?

As a young woman, Malikah said, she didn't care for former D.A. Lynne Abraham.

Now, she said, she understood that Abraham "was keeping criminals off the street. And I felt like Krasner, he's being lenient. Why's nobody in the city of Philadelphia reaching out to us mothers?"

"How can a murderer be out on the street?" she asked. "Why doesn't anybody care. Why doesn't anybody want to meet with us. Why is this going on?"

10:53 a.m.

Jennifer Meleski is talking on video about the murder of her son, Chuckie, who fell asleep in his car on Madison Street, and was shot to death by two killers.

It took homicide two days to get on the case, Jennifer said. The detectives were slow to go get surveillance video and talk to a witness who saw the whole thing.

His killers are still at large. And Jennifer can't believe how young kids are behaving these days in her neighborhood.

"They're seeing older kids walking around with guns," she said. Meanwhile, drug addicts are openly getting high in Kensington. And drug dealers are openly selling.

Kensington, she said, is drawing addicts from all over the state.

Since she lost her son, she told the committee, "I'm not the same."

11:02 a.m.

Nakisha Billa, the only crime victim to testify in person today, is the mother of Dominic Billa, 21, a murder victim who was shot to death at a shopping mall in Northeast Philadelphia.

"A mother's worst nightmare," she said.

At the time, Dominic was looking for a job. Nakisha is the first witness at this hearing to testify live.

On March 29, 2021, "Dominic left home, never to return," she said.

On the last day she saw him, she said, she keeps asking herself, "Did I kiss him. Did I hug him? Did I tell him that I love him?"

She did all of those things, but it brings her little comfort.

"The grief is unbearable," she said.

Now she's talking about witnesses who don't show up in court.

"People don't testify because they're fearful," she said.

Meanwhile, outside we're hearing a pro-Krasner rally getting noisy.

Back in the hearing room, Nakisha stated how she was an early supporter of Larry Krasner, thinking he would bring some long-sought justice to the black community.

But now she compares the constant release of accused criminals by the D.A.'s office to "the scoreboard at a basketball game."

The man who killed her son should have been in jail, she said. But the D.A.'s office isn't so good at prosecuting crime.

"I'm here because of the lawlessness that plagues this city," she said.

"There is no accountability," she said. Especially in the prosecution of her son's murderer.

"And Mr. Krasner knows this personally," she said.

Her son was a good athlete who finished first out his class in the Broad Street Run. He was also a good singer who won a lead role in a production of The Lion King.

And he had a big heart. His mother recalled how Dominic gave a friend who was an orphan a pair of brand new sneakers that Dominic's mother had just bought for him.

She's now calling out the names of young victims of gun violence.

The list is too long and now she's talking about her son.

"Rest In Peace, Dominic," she said.

"The D.A. has contributed to the rise of gun violence over these years because of his policies," she said.

His progressive policies, she said, "should not be at the expense of human life."

Chairman Lawerence asked about her future plans

"I want out. I want out of the city of Philadelphia," she said. Even though she's lived here all her life.

"I don't feel safe," she said. "I live in fear every day. Because I have other children that I worry about."

"I can't hold him hostage," she says when her other son asked her if he could go out with his friends.

When she gets up early every morning to go to work, she says, she has to look all over the place to make sure that somebody's not out there waiting to carjack her.

"I want out," she repeated.

Chairman Lawrence is asking her what she would say to elected officials about what needs to change here in Philadelphia.

Nakisha says she's tired of all the buckpassing that goes on at City Hall and the police department. And she says she'd really like to see "repeat criminals" dealt with.

Rep. Brown has the floor.

He's asking the witness if we can simultaneously reform the criminal justice system as well as "hold criminals accountable."

Yes, she said.

Brown asked if that's what we have now in Philadelphia.

"No," she said.

Brown is asking her if she feels we have "A crisis in lawlessness."

"Yes," she said.

The committee is going to recess until 12:15 p.m.

State Rep. Martina White is being interviewed by a media throng about the plight of crime victims.

"Larry Krasner has denied these victims a voice," she said. "He's tipped the scales of justice in favor of the criminals."

She's pointing out how some two-thirds of the criminals cases allegedly "prosecuted" by Krasner's office last year ended up being withdrawn or dismissed.

Jeff Cole of Fox 29 is asking if White thinks Krasner should be impeached.

"I absolutely believe he needs to be impeached," she said.

12:10 p.m.

While the house select committee is on break, the pro-Krasner rally, still minus the Kras, is still going on across the street.

Cops are telling me that the protesters are getting paid to be there.

At least they brought some good music.

Snacktime Philly, featuring a saxophonist who would make Grover Washington proud, is playing Marvin Gaye's What's Goin' On and Bob Marley's Get Up Stand Up.

12:15 p.m.

The last scheduled witness of the day is Bruce Antkowiah, a legal scholar who is professor and counsel to Saint Vincent College. He was asked by the house select committee to look into state Supreme Court Justice Kevin Dougherty's blistering criticism of Krasner's indictment of Ryan Pownall, a former police officer, for murder.

According to Dougherty, Krasner abused the grand jury process by purposely withholding from the grand jury relevant case law that would have justified the police officer's use of deadly force.

Dougherty also charged that the grand jury produced a tainted grand jury presentment that Krasner fed to the media, so they would tar and feather Pownall before he went on trial in November.

Antkowiah, however, is telling the house select committee that in Pennsylvania, Krasner has wide prosecutorial discretion to present a case to a grand jury, And that ultimately, the "final word" on Krasner's performance in office will be made by voters.

Now the prof is being asked a bunch of questions about how grand juries function in Philadelphia and it's pretty boring. I'm tempted to go back out on the streets with the Krasner fans and hear more music from Snacktime Philly.

Uh oh. Now the professor is saying that the grand jury should have been instructed by the D.A.'s office on any adverse case law in the Pownall case. In other words, the D.A.'s office was obligated to present to the Pownall grand jury the relevant case law regarding justifiable use of force by a police officer.

What the rather dull prof seems to be saying is that Larry Krasner wasn't playing fair when he purposely kept the grand jury ignorant of adverse case law in the Pownall case.

Imagine that, Larry Krasner putting his fat thumb on the scales of justice to indict a cop for murder.

The Pownall case, the prof says, deserves further scrutiny.

Now, they're discussing the defendant's right in the Pownall case to have a preliminary hearing, and confront the evidence against him.

In the Pownall case, the D.A.'s office successfully talked a judge out of holding a preliminary hearing.

Another slick move by Lyin' Larry K to nail a cop.

The prof says in retrospect, the judge's decision to deny defendant Pownall a preliminary hearing seems problematic.

"That's a decision that would have to be reexamined," the prof says.

And so shortly after 1 p.m. today, we are done with today's witnesses. The hearings will resume at 10 a.m. tomorrow.

After the hearing, I got a chance to ask Chairman Lawerence about the rumors that D.A. Krasner sought to be present at today's hearing.

Lawrence gave me a pointed reply that it was the committee who decided what witnesses to call. And if the committee wanted the D.A. here, they would bring him in.

As I was leaving, I was hoping to talk to the Krasner protesters outside, to find out if they were getting paid to be there.

But apparently their shift was over, and they were all gone.

By Ralph Cipriano
for BigTrial.net

The curtain is about to go up on day two of the Larry Krasner impeachment hearings.

And already it's a complete failure.

Sifting through the half-dozen witnesses who appeared at yesterday's hearing, one thing is clear -- not one of them laid a glove on Krasner.

Of the five crime relatives of crime victims who testified, only one of whom was a live witness, not one gave any evidence of any malfeasance by Krasner. Or even any evidence of any direct interaction with him, where they could have complained that Larry was mean to them.

The relatives of crime victims who testified, four of whom appeared on video, complained more about the cops than they did about Krasner. The testimonies were unfocused and rambling. The fact that these were video presentations that could have been edited for clarity proves that whomever was responsible for putting those videos together had no idea what they were doing.

A similar criticism could be leveled at the members of the house select committee who have presided over this disaster. If they think they're going to impeach Krasner with the weak sauce they've served up to date, they're as delusional as he is.

Memo to D.A. Krasner -- take a day off, bud. And don't spend any more of your political allies' money on getting demonstrators to show up down here to stage "spontaneous" protests featuring people dressed up as circus animals.

Concerning what's going on in the Navy Yard, thanks to the ineptitude of your political opponents, you've got nothing to worry about.

If I was running these hearings, my first two witnesses would have been show stoppers.

I would have led with Linda Schellenger, whose son, Sean Schellenger, was stabbed to death by Michael White, a guy that Krasner conspired with defense lawyers to make sure he got off.

Schellenger would have told how, after her son was murdered in cold blood outside Rittenhouse Square, she called Larry Krasner for five straight days, trying to talk to him. And for five straight days, the D.A. wouldn't return any of her calls.

Schellenger could subsequently relate how, while Krasner didn't give her the time of day, he spent more than three hours huddling behind closed doors conspiring with Michael White and his defense lawyers to make sure he beat the rap.

Schellenger could have explained how, on the Friday before the trial of her son's murderer was to begin, Krasner finally called her to tell her that he was dropping the lead charge against her son's cold-blooded killer, of third-degree murder, so that Michael White would have a better chance to get off on voluntary manslaughter.

When Linda Schellenger protested that Krasner should let the jury decide whether White committed murder or not, the D.A. exploded.

"He literally yelled at me on the phone," Linda Schellenger said. He admonished her for "questioning his authority and his intellect," she said, before telling her, "This is my decision."

My second witness would have been Lisa Hart Newman. She's the relative of a couple of crime victims that U.S. District Court Judge Mitchell Goldberg, in sanctioning the D.A.'s office for repeatedly lying to him, ordered Krasner to write a personal letter of apology to.

When Hart Newman was just seven months old, she was in the house the day Robert Wharton and a co-defendant brutally strangled and drowned her parents. After the murders, Wharton and his co-defendant ransacked the house, stole Hart Newman's crib, and turned off the heat in the dead of winter, leaving the infant alone to die.

Wharton was convicted of murder and sentenced to death. Krasner entered the case four decades later to try and get Wharton off death row. To pull that off, Krasner's D.A.'s office had to falsely claim to the judge that Wharton had supposedly rehabilitated himself in prison.

Do pull that off, the D.A. had to purposely try and hide from the judge the details about Wharton's attempted escape from a courtroom, only to be stopped when a sheriff's deputy shot him.

The D.A.'s office also had to lie to the judge by falsely claiming they had informed Hart Newman and three of her relatives about Krasner's plan to get the brutal killer of her parents off death row.

And the D.A.'s office also had to falsely claim to the judge that Hart Newman and her three relatives had no objection to springing Wharton off death row.

Schellenger and Hart-Newman would have been two witnesses who could have provided first-person accounts about their experiences with Krasner, his unethical actions, and his complete disdain for crime victims and their relatives.

Instead, the house select committee took a half-dozen shots at Krasner yesterday, and missed every time.

10:00 a.m.

John Lawrence, the state representative who chairs the committee, opens today's hearing by criticizing Krasner's allies for staging "literally a circus" outside the building yesterday that featured people dressed up as elephants and zebras, and some guy walking on stilts.

Lawerence is saying how serious the committee's mission is, and how disrespectful it was for Krasner's allies to stage a circus while relatives of crime victims were tearfully testifying about their personal tragedies.

OK, so Krasner's allies are guilty of bad optics. Can he be impeached for that?

Today's first witness is Greg Rowe, executive director of the Pennsylvania District Attorney Association.

Rowe is explaining how, out of 67 counties in Pennsylvania, only one county, Philadelphia, isn't a member of his association. That's because one of Krasner's first acts was to drop out of the D.A.'s Association, because he felt they were too punitive and relied too much on incarceration.

Imagine that.

Rowe is now explaining all the training courses that his association sponsors, training sessions that could have helped educate the poorly-trained and inexperienced rookie prosecutors in Larry Krasner's office maybe win a case for a change.

Rowe's testimony appears to paint Larry Krasner as not a team player. But we already knew that.

Now Rep. Amen Brown is asking Rowe some theoretical questions about bail. Rep. Wendi Thomas is asking Rowe to define what an ADA's job is.

In terms of impeachment, we're going nowhere again.

Thomas is asking Rowe about whether it's kosher for a D.A. to selectively enforce only the laws that he agrees with, and ignores the laws that he doesn't agree with.

Prosecutors in Pennsylvania, Rowe replies, have wide discretion to "utilize the laws as they see fit as long as they do it in a way that seeks justice."

Now there's an opening you could drive a truck through.

Somewhere, Larry Krasner is smiling.

I'm tempted to go outside and visit the circus sponsored by Krasner's allies, to see how the elephant and zebra and the guy on stilts are doing.

It's got to be more interesting than this.

Before today's hearing began, I did get a chance to talk to some of the organizers of the circus protest. And they all insisted that they're not getting paid.

Yeah, right. They're just concerned citizens who gave up a day at work to come down to the Navy Yard and dress up as circus animals.

Now state Rep. Ecker is asking Rowe about the reports of an alleged lack of training for young prosecutors in the D.A.'s office.

Rowe hasn't heard much about that.

How about subpoenaing some young prosecutors who went to work for Larry and quit in frustration because they got no training and were overworked.

Instead, we continue with a theoretical discussion with a witness who's not going to help anybody impeach Larry Krasner.

11:10 a.m.

State Rep. John Lawerence, the chairman of the committee, is asking Rowe about the wisdom of dismissing many of your senior prosecutors. And then hiring a bunch of kids fresh out of law school to replace them. But not giving them the training courses offered to every other county in the state by Rowe's D.A. association.

If you do all that, Lawerence asks, aren't you increasing the odds that some rookie prosecutor will screw up a case by making a procedural error?

Yes, Rowe says.

On my blog for the past five years, I've written many examples of Krasner's rookie prosecutors screwing up cases. And criminals getting off, to commit more crimes such as murder.

But no sense presenting any specific testimony. Let's keep it theoretical.

Now the amateurs on the house select committee are taking a five minute break.

11:28 a.m.

Today's last witness is Mark Bergstrom, executive director of the Pennsylvania Commission On Sentencing. The commission did a study on sentences across the state for gun crimes for the years 2015-2020.

The report was a real snore. And so is Bergstrom as he explains the finer points of VUFA, or violations of the Uniform Firearms Act.

It's time to invite the elephant and the zebra into the hearing room, so we can wake up the press.

Bergstrom is explaining that gun cases in Philadelphia are dismissed or withdrawn at a higher rate, 17%, as opposed to the state-wide average for dismissed or withdrawn cases, which is 12%.

That's hardly a surprise considering that of all the criminal cases filed by the D.A.'s office last year, some two-thirds were either dismissed or withdrawn.

Bergstrom's got plenty of charts and graphs up on a display screen but my problem is I'm losing consciousness as he drones on about numbers of cases and percentages and non-pending VUFA documents.

Less than riveting testimony that takes us nowhere.

12:02 p.m.

Guilty pleas in Philadelphia gun cases have dropped from 88% in 2015 to 66% in 2020, Bergstrom says. It's a steeper drop than in the rest of the state.

More evidence that Larry Krasner's prosecutors don't know what they're doing.

The rate of repeat offenders of gun crimes in Philadelphia is at 33%, as opposed to a state average of 20%, Bergstrom is saying. From 2015 to 2020, the number of gun cases dismissed, withdrawn or nolle prossed [not prosecuted] has risen from 7% to 21%.

State Rep. Lawerence is asking Bergstrom why such an increase.

And he responds, "I don't know."

"The question is, why is that happening," he adds.

12:35 p.m.

The committee is adjourned.

Krasner prepares to bolt his own press conference

By Ralph Cipriano
for BigTrial.net

On Sept. 19th, a mother who was about to drive her daughter to school at 6:15 a.m. in Northeast Philadelphia was confronted by a carjacker who pointed a black handgun at both of their heads.

Ten days later, U.S. Attorney Jacqueline Romero announced that her office had arrested Amir Harvey, 20, of the Olney section of the city, and charged him with the carjacking of the mother and daughter that took place in the 8900 block of Maxwell Place.

It turns out that Harvey has a rap sheet that included seven arrests in the past five years. He's a suspect in at least four carjackings, including one case where he previously pointed a gun in the faces of a mother and her children. He's also been arrested for allegedly firing four shots at police and then barricading himself, rather than surrender.

And remarkably, with all those arrests, Harvey had a smooth voyage through the criminal justice system here in Philadelphia. He's been released on his own recognizance three times. He's had his bail cut in half so it would only cost him $10,000 to get out of jail.

When he pulled previously pulled a gun on the mother and her children, he was released without having to go to jail. On two occasions when he entered a negotiated guilty plea to stealing cars, he got no jail time and was sentenced only to probation. And when he went on trial for stealing a car, he got off.

On Sept. 8, 2021, Harvey was found not guilty or had the charges dismissed or withdrawn on 14 different charges involving his fourth alleged carjacking, charges that included robbery, reckless endangerment and robbery of a motor vehicle.

So the D.A.'s office lost that case. Twelve days later, on Sept. 20, 2021, Harvey was back in court to be sentenced in the case where he allegedly fired four shots at police and then barricaded himself.

And once again, Harvey got a great deal from the D.A.'s office. The most serious charge against him was reckless endangerment. He would up entering a negotiated guilty plea and got a sentence of 11 /2 to 23 months in jail, a deal that included immediate parole for time served.

Amir Harvey

At a press conference today, I asked District Attorney Larry Krasner to explain the "light charges and the light sentence" in the case of Amir Harvey.

"I would have to look into the details of that matter," Krasner replied. But what he did next seemed to indicate that he had no intention of doing so.

"Thank you very much," the D.A. said, before gathering up his papers and abruptly leaving the podium.

Several officials from the D.A.'s office standing behind Krasner looked puzzled as the boss left the room. It's the sixth time since July that Krasner has ended a press conference by fleeing, rather than answer a question from me.

"I've got a follow up question," I told Krasner, but once again, the D.A. was in the process of booking it once again.

"Thank you very much," Krasner repeated as he walked away.

"Didn't you say we had one follow up [question], sir," I asked.

Yes he did. Before Krasner opened up his press conference to questions from the press, the D.A. had promised on camera to answer "one question and a follow up if you need to do so."

But apparently he forgot about that promise.

Before he left, Krasner had told the media how hard his office was working to collaborate with the U.S. Attorney's office on a special task force that seeks to solve the "terrifying and traumatic carjackings" that have become all too commonplace.

According to police, as of late September, carjackings have more than doubled this year in Philadelphia.

As of Sept. 27th, there were 1005 in Philadelphia, compared to the same time last year when the city had less than 500.

Krasner was gone from the podium, but Joanne Pescatore, the ADA Krasner's head of homicide, was still standing there.

So I asked her a follow-up question about a case that I had asked her about the previous week.

According to police, on the night of Dec. 28, 2020, Savion Perez walked up to 24-year-old Ebony Kitchen, who was engaged in a physical altercation with a mother and her son, and executed Kitchen at point blank range by shooting her in the head.

But at a preliminary hearing on July 21, 2021, when a witness failed to appear, Judge James DeLeon dismissed all charges against all four defendants for a lack of prosecution.

What happened next has baffled homicide cops and former prosecutors who reviewed the case.

The D.A.'s office wound up twice refiling the charges against all three co-defendants, but didn't recharge Perez, the alleged shooter.

So Perez went free. And then, according to the cops and the D.A.'s office, Perez went out and allegedly committed two more murders.

When I asked Pescatore a week ago why the D.A.'s office didn't recharge Perez with murder, she blamed it on a witness who, instead of showing up at the preliminary hearing in Philadelphia, moved to Texas.

But I have since learned that instead of just one witness in the case who identified Perez as the shooter, there are three. And these are the same three witnesses who identified the co-defendants.

So I asked Pescatore again why she didn't recharge Perez with murder.

At that moment, Dustin Slaughter, the D.A.'s spokesperson, went up to the podium and cut the audio to the live feed to CBS3, as well as the D.A.'s Facebook page.

So those audiences wouldn't hear Pescatore's reply, which was, "I can't answer that."

And why not, I asked.

"I can't answer that," she repeated.

Since Perez is back in custody, police sources say, he is now a suspect in a fourth murder.

Krasner had called his weekly press conference today to talk about the "sentence and conviction" of two defendants who went on a five-day crime spree in 2018.

One of those defendants, Quadir Simmons, Krasner said, was recently sentenced by a judge, but Krasner didn't tell the media what the sentence was.

Helen Park, and assistant D.A., explained that the crime spree began on Nov. 26, 2018 when Simmons and Julian Johnson stole a car in the 35th Police District.

The next day, Park said, the two suspects shot two men, one in the chest, who was left a paraplegic, and the other in the head, but it was a graze wound. The next day, according to ADA Park, the two suspects shot another man seven times, resulting in "extensive injuries" to his arm and internal organs.

The crime spree came to an end, Park said, when the police arrested the two men after a traffic stop where they recovered firearms from their vehicle. After the arrest, ADA Park said, the defendants were responsible for "a great deal of witness intimidation in this case."

Before he bolted his press conference, Krasner bragged that the prosecution of Quadir Simmons was a result of his office working collaboratively with police "to hold defendants accountable," a collaboration that had resulted in "excellent success."

But what sentence did the defendant receive, D.A. Krasner?

For stealing a car, shooting two men [and leaving one a paraplegic], in addition to gun charges, Quadir Simmons received a minimum sentence of only 12 years, court records show.

When he is paroled, the 22-year-old Simmons, who's been in jail since 2019, will be just 31 years old.

Editor's Note: Frederick Crews, American essayist,literary critic and professor emeritus of English at the University of California, Berkley, reviews In the Lions' Den: The Penn State Scandal and a Rush to Judgment by Graham Spanier. More than a decade later, because the Penn State cover up is still going strong and the media can't admit they blew the story, this article was rejected for publication by six different magazines.

By Frederick Crews

for BigTrial.net

You remember Jerry Sandusky, right? He’s the former Penn State assistant football coach and pedophilic monster who started a foundation, The Second Mile, in order to gain sexual access to prepubescent boys, hundreds of whom he molested, until eight heroic ones stepped forward to tell a jury about their ordeals in 2012, resulting in the sixty-eight-year-old Sandusky’s thirty-to-sixty-year prison term.

If you recall anything else about the case, it is probably the wrenching story of the ten-year-old “little boy in the shower,” who, on February 9, 2001, was seen being raped by Sandusky in a Penn State athletic facility. For some reason the witness, a hulking former quarterback named Mike McQueary, didn’t intervene, but on the next morning he did go straight to the legendary football coach Joe Paterno and tell him about the sodomy.

Paterno conferred with the university’s athletic director, Tim Curley, who then involved a vice president, Gary Schultz, and the president, Graham Spanier. Instead of reporting the crime to the police, however, the three officials conspired to cover it up, thus sparing scandal to their all-important football program. As for the rape victim, he couldn’t appear in person at Sandusky’s trial, because nobody knew who he was.

But there’s a problem with what you remember. It’s sheer folklore. True, Sandusky took a shower with a boy. That’s what he often did, quite openly, after a workout together, and the showers typically included innocent horseplay. That behavior had been commonplace in the recreation center where Sandusky was raised.

As for the incident in question, Mike McQueary initially misremembered its date by more than a year, and then probably misdated it again; he wasn’t at all sure he had glimpsed a sex act, and that’s why he had done nothing to stop it; he evidently didn’t mention it to Paterno until weeks later, and then only in passing; and his subsequent inaction and cordiality toward Sandusky indicated that he had reconsidered his initial concern.

Most crucially, when a grand jury indictment mentioned sodomy, McQueary protested that his testimony, which prosecutors had been nudging him to make more graphic, had been misconstrued. The email he received in response from Deputy Attorney General Jonelle Eshbach said in part, “I know that a lot of this stuff is incorrect and that it is hard not to respond. But you can’t.” In other words, Eshbach and her team had suborned perjury and were still intending to nail Sandusky with it.

As it happened, they failed in that instance. The jury, reasoning that too much time had elapsed since an event that had no identified victim, and taking note of conflicting versions narrated by McQueary, acquitted Sandusky on the charge. This would be the single greatest irony of the many-sided Sandusky case. When the grand jury presentment became known in November 2011, an accusation that would fail to be sustained in July 2012 completed Sandusky’s demonization in the media.

And within four days that same dubious story, automatically presumed to be true, brought about the firing of Curley and Schultz, the forced resignation of Spanier, the subsequent jailing of all three, and the removal from service of the eighty-five-year-old, mortally ill Joe Paterno––the longest-serving, “winningest,” and most revered football coach in America, whose reputation would now be soiled forever. All that to atone for an abomination that was never ascertained to have occurred.

A verdict of not guilty, of course, doesn’t exclude the possibility that a crime was committed. But in this instance, definitive proof of innocence lay at hand. Sandusky remembered the shower and the name of his companion, Allan Myers, who had been nearly fourteen, not ten, at the time; and Myers’s ongoing relation to Sandusky wasn’t that of a rape victim to a perpetrator. On the contrary, he was a virtual member of the Sandusky household both before and after the infamous shower.

Jerry and his wife Dottie had taken Myers with them on two trips to California, and he had lived with them for months in 2005. At Myers’s request, Jerry had delivered the commencement address at his high school graduation; and they had been photographed arm in arm at Myers’s wedding.

But what if Allan Myers simply wasn’t “the little boy in the shower”? Not possible. At age twenty-four he, too, still remembered the incident, and when he learned that it figured in the criminal case, he gave a sworn statement to Sandusky’s lawyers:

I would usually work out one or two days a week, but this particular night is very clear in my mind. We were in the shower and Jerry and I were slapping towels at each other to sting each other. I would slap the walls and slide on the shower floor, which I am sure you could have heard from the wooden locker area.

While we were engaged in fun as I have described, I heard the sound of a wooden locker door close. . . . I never saw who closed the locker. The grand jury report says that Coach McQueary said he observed Jerry and I engaged in sexual activity. That is not the truth and McQueary is not telling the truth. Nothing occurred that night in the shower.

Later we will see why Myers, who had previously been grilled by the police and had resisted their attempt to recruit him as a victim, didn’t testify for Sandusky or even identify himself at the trial. The answer will lead to a perspective on the whole Sandusky matter that challenges received opinion to its core.

2.

But first, we have an important book to consider: Graham Spanier’s In the Lions’ Den: The Penn State Scandal and a Rush to Judgment. The author served as Penn State’s president from 1995 to 2011. As the first extended statement by a principal figure in the events of 2011-12, and as a recital that rings true throughout, his book is a precious contribution to our understanding. And though the subtitle’s “rush to judgment” pertains chiefly to Spanier’s own ordeal, his revelations about mischief caused by other players shows how little confidence we can have in the authorities who took Sandusky down.

It may strike you as egotistical on Spanier’s part to be placing himself at the vortex of the Sandusky hurricane. To be sure, his two months in jail and the hatred directed at him year after year were unmerited, and they took a heavy toll.

But they hardly compare to what Sandusky himself has endured: ten years in prison, the first five of which were passed in solitary confinement, and universal vilification that has never let up. But Spanier has a point. If he wasn’t the most abused party in the Penn State scandal, he was the most important target of a plot that I will set forth. And his removal as president, forestalling a due-process approach to the grand jury’s sensational charges, initiated a cascade of bad decisions and real cover-ups from whose consequences the university has by no means recovered.

As president of Penn State, Spanier compiled a superb record of upgrading both research and instruction. He can hardly be blamed for now emphasizing his accomplishments. More pertinently for the trustworthiness of his narrative, no one ever questioned his integrity. Nor, for that matter, had there been any prior complaints against Messrs. Curley, Schultz, and Paterno.

Despite the crude popular belief that Penn State exists only for football, those who knew Paterno understood that he regarded himself as a teacher of ethics and that he characteristically put the university’s interests ahead of his team’s.

Who, then, unless in an atmosphere of general panic, could believe that those four men would jeopardize their honor by hiding the rape of a child by a man who hadn’t even been a university employee at the time? Spanier in particular is offended by the suggestion, for he underwent sadistic childhood whipping, and he reserves a special disgust for perpetrators.

All four of the accused testified that no one had informed them of a sex crime. Their conduct is consistent with no other supposition. They deemed it inappropriate on Sandusky’s part to be showering with kids on campus, and they admonished him never to do it again. And they notified the current head of The Second Mile that its founder had behaved imprudently. Those mild actions were proportionate to the information the four were given. Spanier is strictly correct in asserting that he, Curley, Schultz, and Paterno did nothing wrong.

When the grand jury’s indictment of Sandusky was made public in November 2011, however, it contained an explosive surprise: Curley and Schultz had been indicted, too, for “failure to report,” and an inference could be drawn that they had protected Joe Paterno’s football program.

One of the anachronisms in Pennsylvania’s judicial system is that a grand jury charged with investigating one suspect can scoop up others as well. Curley, Schultz, and Paterno, all of whom had told the grand jury about their handling of the McQueary matter, had been given no inkling that they were targets. Thus the presentment, written by the prosecutors, not the jury, must have been intended to throw the Penn State community into the chaos that ensued.

Now, what could have caused the Pennsylvania attorney general’s team, which had assumed responsibility for the Sandusky case, to harbor a special animus against Penn State? By now the answer to that question, which Spanier lays out with admirable clarity and detail, is known to many people. The attorney general, Linda Kelly, had been hand picked by the Republican governor, Tom Corbett, who had himself been the attorney general preceding Kelly. Corbett had a contentious relation to Penn State in general and to Graham Spanier in particular, and a motive for getting Kelly to do his bidding.

It was common knowledge that Corbett disliked public higher education and was resentful toward Penn State. One of his early moves after assuming office in January 2011 was to announce a devastating cut of 52.4% in the university’s budget. Spanier immediately and dramatically protested, and the legislature took his side.

In Corbett’s eyes, that was an unforgivable humiliation. But he had already contracted negative feelings toward Spanier. In October 2010, when running for office, he had gained the mistaken impression that Spanier was publicly favoring the Democratic candidate, Dan Onorato. Corbett was heard to say that after his election, he would have Spanier’s head.

The leading prosecutor of Sandusky was Frank Fina, chief of the criminal division in the attorney general’s office. The grand jury presentment was his and Jonelle Eshbach’s creation, and both of them were serving Corbett’s wishes as mediated by Attorney General Kelly. As Spanier now explains, the indictment of Curley and Schultz seems to have been motivated by two considerations.

First, their status as accused criminals would prevent them from testifying in Sandusky’s favor with regard to the shower incident. And second, Fina, who was known for tactics of bullying and intimidation, expected that Curley and Schultz would save themselves from jail by turning on Spanier, whose indictment was already foreseen. The big fish to be hauled in wasn’t the ancient Joe Paterno, and it certainly wasn’t the insignificant retiree Jerry Sandusky; it was Spanier.

When the media began depicting Paterno as a co-conspirator with Curley and Schultz, Spanier knew that a voice of leadership was needed. He announced his personal faith in his accused subordinates, whom he knew to be innocent, and he prepared to call for calm and patience. But Penn State’s trustees were egged on by Governor Corbett, who told them by speakerphone, “Remember that little boy in the shower!”

They forbade Spanier to say another word in public. And the new de facto chairman of the trustees, John Surma, a former CEO of U.S. Steel, saw an opportunity to settle a personal grudge against Paterno. (His troubled nephew had been dropped from the football team.) As State College erupted in riots after Paterno’s dismissal, Spanier grasped that his own fate had been decided as well. He quickly resigned, thus temporarily safeguarding some privileges and his pension.

The subsequent behavior of the leading trustees, from November 2011 until right now, offers a textbook example of how to make a bad situation worse. Rather than combat the fiction that Penn State had sacrificed children to the great god Football, they embraced it.

They welcomed draconian sanctions from the National Collegiate Athletic Association, heaped disgrace on the dead Paterno, left Spanier, Curley, and Schultz to twist in the wind, and established a huge fund for the compensation of Sandusky’s as yet unproven victims, as if every one of them had been molested with an assist from Penn State.

The idea was to make a show of remorse and penitence so as to turn a new page with alumni, parents, and donors––and, not incidentally, to keep the 2012 football season from being canceled. That last goal was met, but the stench of hypocrisy has remained in the air.

The trustees’ most craven action was to appoint an “investigative” body whose actual task was to justify their other measures by scapegoating Paterno, Spanier, Curley, and Schultz. The supposedly independent commission, formed at the joint urging of Governor Corbett and Louis Freeh, the former FBI director who was now seeking private employment, worked hand in glove with Corbett, the trustees, Linda Kelly’s point man Frank Fina, and the NCAA, all of whom shared an interest in presuming Sandusky’s guilt and the four sacked officials’ complicity in it.

The Freeh commission didn’t bother to interview principal figures in the case. Although the Federal Investigative Service reaffirmed Spanier’s top-level security clearance after its intensive study determined that the sodomy-in-the-shower tale was bogus, the Freeh commission stonewalled that finding.

And it sketched a vulgar caricature of Spanier’s Penn State as a football-crazy institution whose actual boss had been the dictatorial Joe Paterno. The Freeh report is no longer taken seriously, but its uncritical acceptance in 2012 locked into place America’s media-fed misperception of the entire Sandusky matter.

Understandably, large portions of In the Lions’ Den are taken up with Spanier’s legal vicissitudes, from his indictment in 2012 through his nightmarish jail term in 2021. The saga is beyond Kafkaesque. Spanier was betrayed, in amazing fashion, by Penn State’s legal counsel Cynthia Baldwin, who pretended to act as his personal attorney.

In reality, she was controlled by Frank Fina, who held over her a constant threat of prosecution for having ignored subpoenas to Penn State. Baldwin knew that Spanier was a grand jury target but convinced him otherwise, and at Fina’s insistence she later gave carefully rehearsed false testimony about his alleged orchestration of a cover-up.

For their misconduct, Fina would be suspended from the practice of law and Baldwin would be formally censured and then ostracized by the entire legal community. But a new attorney general, Kathleen Kane, and then yet another one, the Josh Shapiro who is now a lesser-evil candidate for governor, kept the pressure on Spanier, eventually hounding him into jail despite the ruling of a federal appeals panel that the charges against him lacked any merit.

One reward for reading about Spanier’s eight years of legal torment is that one gets an up-close look at Pennsylvania’s judicial system in action. It’s a farce in which political ambition and personal rivalry can determine a defendant’s fate; in which collusion between prosecutors and judges is commonplace; in which some courtroom rulings are determined not by law but by a presumption of guilt; and in which incompetent judges summarily deny appeals in order to support their friends, other incompetent judges.

A fitting symbol of the whole circus is an email network that came to light, consisting of racist, sexist, misogynistic, homophobic pornography that was shared between Deputy Attorney General Fina and various judges, including two justices of Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court.

3.

As we have seen, the only part of the Sandusky case that bears on Graham Spanier’s tribulations is the legendary shower and its aftermath. But it’s impossible to read In the Lions’ Den without realizing that it brings into question the fairness of Sandusky’s own prosecution and trial. Spanier and Sandusky were both implacably pursued by Linda Kelly, Jonelle Eshbach, and Frank Fina, who was not above threatening witnesses, making shifty deals with judges, and leaking grand jury testimony in order to pollute a jury pool.

Although Spanier avoids the question of Sandusky’s guilt or innocence, he points out that the alleged pedophile’s trial was rushed; that the prosecution used an old trick in dumping possibly exculpatory documents on the defense when insufficient time remained to read them; and that the judge wouldn’t even allow Sandusky’s lead attorney to resign on grounds that he was unprepared to proceed.

But as you could learn from chapters 14-17 of Mark Pendergrast’s indispensable book The Most Hated Man in America: Jerry Sandusky and the Rush to Judgment (Sunbury Press, 2017), that’s just a sampling of the travesty that ended in a foreordained conviction.

A knowledgeable student of the Sandusky case who reads In the Lions’ Den would be able to infer some previously unnoted linkage between Spanier’s fate and Sandusky’s. For example, in March 2011 the attorney general’s case against Sandusky was on life support. Kelly, Fina, and Eshbach had only two witnesses, Mike McQueary and Sandusky’s main accuser, Aaron Fisher, neither of whom could keep his story straight. But that was the month when Tom Corbett and Graham Spanier waged their battle royal over Penn State’s budget––a battle that ended by putting a target on the victorious Spanier’s back.

Suddenly, new momentum was imparted to the campaign against Sandusky, which was taken into the public sphere. On March 31, feloniously leaked grand jury material found its way into the first of cub reporter Sara Ganim’s lurid articles, which would bear such inflammatory titles as “Former Coach Jerry Sandusky Used Charity to Molest Kids.”

And in the following weeks, twelve employees of the attorney general’s office and many state troopers set out to interview hundreds of ex-Second Milers, some of whom might be willing to declare that Sandusky had molested them. Each interrogated boy or man was told, falsely, that many others had already admitted to having been abused.

The dragnet, however, yielded only a file of tributes to Sandusky’s generosity and sterling character. As one officer grumbled in frustration, his interviewees “believe Sandusky is a great role model for them to emulate.”

Here was precious evidence that Sandusky was no child molester. But Kelly and her team, apparently fired up by Corbett, were now playing hardball. Instead of supplying the police files to Sandusky’s attorneys as required by law, they withheld them and wrote insinuatingly, in their grand jury presentment, “through the Second Mile, Sandusky had access to hundreds of boys.”

By means of their Freeh commission and their lavish, no-questions-asked compensation fund, the Penn State trustees played a significant role in destroying Sandusky. The fund, established before his trial, attracted scammers who reinforced the impression that many more victims of the monster’s abuse were awaiting discovery.

But that wasn’t all. Two local “sex abuse” lawyers, Andrew Shubin and Benjamin Andreozzi, sensed what was coming from Penn State and advertised their services to anyone who looked forward to making a claim.

All of the young men (not boys) who were being prepped to testify against Sandusky answered the call. And someone else did, too: Allan Myers. Just weeks after he had exculpated Sandusky in straightforward terms, he became Shubin’s client and was persuaded to affirm, in a statement evidently written by Shubin, that Sandusky had frequently molested him over a period of years.

Then, as Spanier recounts, Shubin physically hid Myers for the duration of Sandusky’s trial, forestalling a catastrophic cross-examination. And prosecutor Joseph McGettigan, in full awareness of the truth, told Sandusky’s jury that only God knew the shower boy’s identity. When Sandusky was acquitted on the relevant charge, it didn’t matter to Myers and Shubin. They picked up a cool $6.9 million from Penn State.

The other accusers didn’t fare badly, either, sharing with their attorneys sums ranging from $1.5 to $20 million, depending on the extremity of their reported suffering. The highest settlement went to an accuser, a good friend of the Sanduskys through at least October 2011, who now said Jerry had assaulted him about 150 times and on one occasion had locked him in his basement, starved him, and raped him anally and orally over a three-day period while Dottie Sandusky, one floor above, ignored his screams.

This was at a time when Jerry, already in his sixties, was suffering from prostatitis, dizzy spells, kidney cysts, a braIn aneurism, a hernia, bleeding hemorrhoids, chest pains, headaches, hypothyroidism, high blood pressure, and sleep apnea, to say nothing of his lifelong testosterone deficiency and of his shrunken testicles, unremarked by any accuser.

But there was another important outcome of the trustees’ munificence (with insurance money). Even after the attorney general’s office, partly with the help of a telephone hotline, had rounded up a handful of previously unconcerned “victims” to supplement the wavering McQueary and Fisher, those who actually knew Sandusky remembered him as a kindly mentor and hesitated to say anything against him.

Worse, not one of them, in boyhood or thereafter, had ever disclosed abuse by Sandusky to anyone. And still worse, none of them, including Aaron Fisher, had gone to the police without being prodded or enticed. Most inconveniently of all, the pre-hotline “victims” harbored no memory of their molestation. They had to have their minds massaged by already convinced therapists, social workers, and cops. But once the prospect of multimillion-dollar payouts hove into view, “memories” began to flow in earnest. Penn State’s trustees deserve the credit for that.

Fisher had been brought around to “recalling” Sandusky’s depredations after many months of treatment by a recovered-memory therapist, Mike Gillum. As Fisher wrote in the book they later coauthored, “It wasn’t until I was fifteen and started seeing Mike that I realized the horror.” Now Shubin and Andreozzi decided to send their Sandusky-case clients to memory spelunkers, with Gillum as their principal resource.

The result was spectacular: an outpouring of “refreshed memories” so grotesque and ridiculous that they needed to be severely winnowed by Linda Kelly’s team. Then Kelly could exult, at a rally on the courthouse steps after Sandusky’s conviction, “it was incredibly difficult for some [victims] to unearth long-buried memories of the shocking abuse” Sandusky had inflicted on them.

Whether the hostile witnesses were driven more by greed or by therapeutic suggestion is impossible to say. We can assert with confidence, though, that Penn State’s pot of gold, descried at the end of the rainbow by Messrs. Shubin and Andreozzi, helped to turn alleged misdemeanors into horrific felonies that would overawe an ingenuous jury.

4.

When no firm evidence can be found to adjudicate between clashing allegations, plausibility can serve as a deciding factor. If, for example, you say you were raped a previously unrecalled 150 times by the same person, you’ll be hard pressed to explain why, after the first devastating trauma, you put yourself in harm’s way on 149 further occasions.

Did repression or dissociation cause each event to be immediately forgotten? But now you’re trafficking in pseudoscience, and your claim can’t be believed, much less allowed in court. (Except in Pennsylvania, that is.)

In the case of the little boy in the shower, sufficient evidence does exist to prove that Graham Spanier, not Frank Fina, was telling the truth about it. There can be no doubt that Allan Myers’s first statements on the matter were the authentic ones. But suppose Myers hadn’t presented himself in support of his benefactor. Then we would have had to choose whom to believe. Everything that is known about Spanier speaks to his credibility; the opposite must be said of Fina.

By the same token, it’s no contest between Fina and the Jerry Sandusky who was known to friends, associates, and the public before Sara Ganim’s Pulitzer Prize-winning journalism began smearing him in 2011. As Spanier puts it, Sandusky “was perhaps the second most admired figure in central Pennsylvania, and maybe the entire state, through the 1980s and 1990s.”

The coaching of linebackers was subordinate to the help he provided, in person and through his foundation, to some 100,000 at-risk boys, whom he taught to play sports, shun alcohol, drugs, and early sex, and apply themselves to schoolwork. On his retirement from coaching, Sports Illustrated’s cover story named him “Saint Sandusky.”

In order to have molested children with impunity for decades, Sandusky would have had to deploy superhuman powers of stealth, guile, and intimidation. But if you watch interviews with him on YouTube, you will see an earnest, unsubtle man who has trouble even fathoming the questions posed to him. That picture is consistent with the Jerry known to his family, friends, and associates: a grown-up Boy Scout who eschewed alcohol and tobacco, and a Bible-reading Methodist who practiced the Golden Rule.

No one can say whether there was an erotic component to the affection Jerry showed to the relatively small number of boys he personally supervised. The point to bear in mind is that we don’t customarily send people to prison for their thoughts and feelings. And if it’s sexual abuse to hug an abandoned or neglected twelve-year-old, we’re all in trouble.

Sandusky, Paterno, Spanier, Curley, Schultz. They represent diverse levels of sophistication, but they all devoted themselves to Penn State and were betrayed by it. The university’s clumsy and then stupidly cruel trustees have tried to restore trust at those men’s expense.

It hasn’t worked, because Paterno’s memory is still sacred to many. Next––we already see signs of it––they will ease up on Paterno alone, hoping that will do the trick. In the Lions’ Den will help in that effort by proving that Joe behaved honorably to the end. But another guiltless man is being left to rot in prison. Does anyone out there care about simple justice?

Earlier: The Unspeakable Sandusky:

https://medium.com/@crewsfrederick1/the-unspeakable-sandusky-5d699144e48d

Frederick Crews’s most recent book is Freud: The Making of an Illusion (2017).

By Ralph Cipriano
for BigTrial.net

According to an arbitrator's report, Police Commissioner Danielle Outlaw relied on a "fabricated account of a violent assault" in 2020 when she unjustly fired Chief Inspector Anthony Boyle.

In a 13-page analysis and decision, arbitrator Walt DeTreux ruled that Outlaw's big mistake was to buy into Captain LaVerne Vann's fabricated story that in an argument over whether a prisoner should be charged, that Boyle had "forcibly grabbed Capt. Vann with both hands and was bending her arm behind her back" besides being "derelict in his duty."

When Outlaw's firing of Boyle went to arbitration during four hearings in January, March and May of this year, the city "failed to prove any of those charges," DeTreux wrote. While relying on Vann's fabricated story of abuse, DeTreaux wrote, Outlaw also chose to ignore "the fairly consistent and credible accounts of other participants and eyewitnesses that indicated Chief Boyle was trying to separate the prisoner from Capt. Vann's interlocking arm hold and rough treatment."

The arbitrator's decision to reinstate Boyle was announced in July, but the contents of the arbitrator's 13-page report have not been disclosed until now.

In firing Boyle, the arbitrator wrote, Outlaw and other city officials also chose to disregard "Capt. Vann's repeated insubordination in refusing to release" the prisoner she and Boyle were arguing over.

Outlaw and other city officials, the arbitrator found, also dismissed testimony that during the confrontation between Boyle and Vann, that Boyle was responding to Vann's "defiance of his direct orders." And that Vann responded by "yanking" the prisoner away and "bending her forward until she cried out in pain."

When the city fired Boyle, he was cited for going "hands on," the arbitrator wrote. This made no sense because of the city's "own directive that requires an officer to stop another officer engaged in the use of inappropriate or excessive force," the arbitrator wrote in clearing Boyle of all the charges.

"For all these reasons, I find that the city did not have just cause to discharge of discipline Chief Inspector Anthony Boyle," the arbitrator concluded.

"To remedy this unjust discharge," DeTreaux wrote, Boyle, who had 44 years on the job, should be reinstated to his former position "with no loss of seniority" as well as receive "back pay and benefits from the date of his discharge to the date of his reinstatement."

As for Vann, the arbitrator wrote, "the parties did not indicate whether Capt. Vann faced any disciplinary consequences."

Vann was one of four officers who subsequently sued the department and Boyle, claiming racial discrimination. The lawsuit also alleged that Boyle had allegedly falsified paperwork, hid information from the D.A.'s office, and retaliated against the officers who sued him.

According to The Philadelphia Inquirer, the city decided to settle one of the lawsuits by paying Vann and former Staff Inspector Debra Frazier a total of $177,400.

When the arbitrator's decision to reinstate Boyle was announced in July, George Bochetto, Boyle's lawyer, told the Inquirer that the arbitrator's decision was "a testament to the integrity of Tony Boyle, and it really does show what he's been put through."

The Police Department declined comment, except to say that it was reviewing the arbitrator's decision.

Bochetto, Boyle's lawyer, could not be reached for comment yesterday.

A spokesperson for the Police Department referred comment to the city solicitor's office, which did not respond to a request or comment.

In his analysis, the arbitrator traced the dispute between Boyle and Vann back to 2017, when former Police Commissioner Richard Ross assigned Boyle, Inspector Ray Evers, and Captain Vann to lead the Narcotics Bureau under the command of then Deputy Commissioner Dennis Wilson.

The arbitrator quoted Evers as testifying that Wilson wanted the narcs to pursue "bigger jobs, stronger jobs" that would involving debriefing and flipping the "small fish" in the "hope of securing information that would implicate the 'bigger fish.'"

According to the arbitrator, however, Captain Vann was not on board with flipping drug dealers into informants. On Sept. 13, 2018, she issued a memo to the members of the Narcotics Strike Force saying that "under no circumstances" would officers or supervisors delay the filing of a so-called PARS report notifying the D.A.'s office of an arrest "for the purposes of gathering information toward future investigations."

According to the arbitrator, Vann did not share her memo with any of her superiors, including Boyle and Wilson.

On Oct. 3, 2018, the Narcotics Bureau investigated drug dealers operating out of a warehouse at I Street and Erie Avenue and arrested a woman for buying heroin. During a debriefing, the arbitrator wrote, the woman "offered information regarding the selling of firearms and a recent homicide."

While the police were investigating the information they got from the prisoner, Chief Boyle decided that the prisoner would be released, rather than charged that day. Boyle also ordered that the prisoner be taken home by police in an unmarked vehicle.

That sparked an argument between Boyle and Vann over the release of the prisoner. Boyle informed Vann that the prisoner was to be released and that the D.A.'s office had signed off on the release.

Vann asked Boyle if he "had it in writing." According to the arbitrator, Boyle directed Vann to not get involved in the situation. When Vann asked again for something in writing, Boyle replied, "You don't need it in writing, I'm giving you an order."

Vann, according to the arbitrator, then borrowed handcuffs from another officer and handcuffed the prisoner. When Boyle came over, he ordered Vann to uncuff the prisoner. Two or three times, Boyle repeated this order, the arbitrator wrote, "but Capt. Vann did not comply."

Boyle then placed his hand on the prisoner's arm. As he did so, Vann pulled the prisoner away, "pushing her arms up and forcing her to bend forward," the arbitrator wrote, which caused the prisoner to scream "that she was hurting and in pain."

Boyle grabbed Vann's either hand or wrist to pry it loose from the prisoner's arm, the arbitrator wrote. He also instructed her to release the prisoner.

The two supervisors "struggled for 10 to 20 seconds" before other officers intervened.

After the altercation, Vann alleged that Boyle "pointed his finger in her face while screaming at her." She also charged that while she was trying to uncuff the prisoner, Boyle "grabbed both her wrists, bent her hands back, and pushed her toward the ground," as well as twisted her right arm behind her back.

After Vann made her allegations, Wilson met with Boyle and took his gun away. From October 2018 to July 2020, Boyle remained chief inspector assigned to the Narcotics Bureau but he didn't have any duties.

Neither Police Commissioner Ross nor his successor, Christine Coulter, took any action against Boyle.

In February, the newly appointed Outlaw reviewed the case with Deputy Commissioner Robin Wimberly before deciding to charge Boyle with conduct unbecoming and two counts of failure to supervise. Then, Outlaw used what's known as Commissioner's Direct Action to fire Boyle.

When the commissioner takes direct action, it allows her to bypass any not guilty plea from Boyle, as well as a hearing that would have been conducted by the Police Board of Inquiry.

After Boyle was fired, he responded by filing a grievance.

During an investigation where some 30 witnesses were interviewed, the arbitrator wrote, Vann's story of alleged abuse by Boyle found "little or no support from fellow officers, including her own subordinates, and other witnesses."

Instead, the witnesses testified that as Boyle approached Vann, she "tightened her hold" on the prisoner by slipping her arm through the prisoner's handcuffed arms, the arbitrator wrote. And then she pulled or jerked away the prisoner.

Instead of an assault by Boyle, the arbitrator wrote, cops who witnessed the altercation described it as a tug of war between Boyle and Vann over the prisoner.

In an initial discussion with another supervisor, Vann did not charge that Boyle had assaulted her. Then, she went to Temple Hospital and subsequently claimed she was injured. When she finally went to Internal Affairs, "she fabricated the story of an 'assault,'" the arbitrator concluded.

"Captain Vann's account is simply not credible as it contradicts or conflicts with key details included in all other witness statements and testimony," the arbitrator wrote. "Capt. Vann created an elaborate story of 'assault' that runs counter to the observations of all other witnesses."

The arbitrator found that the department lacks "a clearly written policy regarding flipping" of suspects and turning them into confidential informants. So Boyle's decision to release the prisoner without filing a PARS report was not prohibited by the department. That meant that Boyle "cannot be charged or disciplined for violating a policy that does not exist," the arbitrator wrote.

As I mentioned previously, officials in the Police Department and the city's Law Department did not respond to requests for comment.

However, Derrick Jacobs, a former homicide detective who later sued the department in a whistleblower retaliation lawsuit in federal court, told Big Trial, "This is exactly the same pattern and practice the PPD used against me."

According to Jacobs, the department uses an "arbitrary and capricious disciplinary process" to get rid of cops it deems as enemies.

"Commissioner Outlaw then usurps the rights of officers by taking Commissioner's Direct Action and terminates their employment with false information from Deputy Commissioner Wimberly, who heads internal affairs," Jacobs wrote in an email.

And if Outlaw and Wimberly needed any additional help in getting rid of unwanted officers, Jacobs said, they often relied on an assist from that "useful idiot Dennis Wilson."

Photo credit: Tony Spading

By Ralph Cipriano

for BigTrial.net

The clown show that is the Philadelphia District Attorney's office was fully exposed this afternoon in the courtroom of Common Pleas Court Judge Barbara McDermott.

At the end of a more than two-hour hearing, McDermott ruled that the D.A.'s Aug. 23, 2018 grand jury indictment of former police officer Ryan Pownall for murder was riddled with so many legal errors that she was quashing the grand jury's report, known as a presentment, because it was "no good" and it's "conclusions cannot be relied on."

What was wrong with the grand jury presentment that charged Pownall for murder in the racially-charged 2017 shooting death of dirt biker David Jones?

For starters, the grand jury was run by former Assistant District Attorney Tracy Tripp, who, depending on your viewpoint, was either [a] totally incompetent or [b] corrupt, or [c] both totally incompetent and corrupt.

In the Pownall case, Krasner, who had just taken office in January 2018, was looking for the first cop he could string up for murder. And that happened to be Ryan Pownall, who fatally shot Jones, who was armed and on the run, after he attempted to escape arrest.

For Krasner, it was a perfect case for headlines because Pownall was white and Jones was black. But the problem was that Krasner's office is so incompetent and/or corrupt that Krasner relied on Tripp to do the job. And the rookie prosecutor did a complete face plant.

For Tripp, a former public defender who joined Krasner's office in February, 2018, running the Pownall grand jury was [a] her first grand jury investigation and [b] her first murder case.

The only qualification that Tripp the novice prosecutor had to be a running a grand jury investigation of a former cop for murder was that she was a true believer like Krasner, the progressive reformer who hates cops, and wanted to nail one of them for murder.

The problem was that when Tripp ran the grand jury, she failed to, as she was required by law, to tell the grand jury the elements that constituted the various charges that it was considering indicting Pownall for, such as murder, or voluntary or involuntary manslaughter.

Tripp, according to the judge, also failed to educate the grand jurors on the key difference in the law that separates murder from manslaughter -- namely whether Pownall was acting with malice or not when he fatally shot Jones.

Tripp also didn't inform the grand jury of the section of the law involving a police officer's justifiable use of force, which would have given Pownall a complete defense against any murder charge.

Judge McDermott isn't the only judge to rip the D.A.'s office for their conduct in the Pownall case.

In July, State Supreme Court Justice Kevin Dougherty publicly charged Krasner with abusing the grand jury process to indict Pownall. According to Dougherty, the D.A.'s office under Krasner was “driven by a win-at-all-cost office culture” that "treats police officers differently than other criminal defendants."

"This is the antithesis of what the law expects of a prosecutor," Dougherty wrote, adding that under the law, a prosecutor is supposed to be a "minister of justice."

Today's hearing began when former Assistant D.A. Sybil Murphy was called to the witness stand to testify about her role back in 2018 as a supervisor of the Pownall jury.

Murphy, now a deputy attorney general under A.G. Josh Shapiro, talked about how the prosecutor's manual in the D.A.'s office requires a prosecutor in a grand jury investigation to not only inform grand jurors of the relevant case law by reading it to them, but also by giving the grand jurors a personal copy of the relevant case law, so they could refer to it during deliberations.

"So the process was to read 'em [the law] and leave 'em" [a copy of the law]," Judge McDermott asked.

"Yes," Murphy replied.

"And the notes of testimony should reflect that?" the judge asked.

"Yes," Murphy replied.

But in the Pownall case, as the note of the grand jury revealed, the prosecutors did neither.

When the judge asked former ADA Murphy whether copies of the relevant case law were left behind in the grand jury room for jurors to review, she replied, "I don't know."

"I did not give them anything," she added.

The grand jury transcripts not only confirm that, but they also show that former ADA Tripp forgot to bring the exhibits to the grand jurors before they deliberated for a full 12 minutes and indicted Pownall for murder.

"We should have stoped the deliberations," former ADA Murphy admitted.

The next witness was former ADA Tracy Tripp, the former criminal justice reformer is no longer employed in the D.A.'s office.

Tripp attempted to tell the judge that even though the grand jury transcripts contain no mention of this, she distinctly remembered printing out copies of the relevant case law for the grand jurors and leaving those copies on the table in the grand jury room, where they were deliberating, so they could read and review them.

When it came time for cross examination, Brian McMonagle, one of the defense lawyers for Pownall, asked Tripp to read through the 50-page transcript of the grand jury minutes on the day they deliberated for 12 minutes before indicting Pownall for murder, to find a mention of Tripp reading the relevant case law to grand jurors, and giving them copies of the relevant case law.

"Take your time," McMonagle advised her.

After Tripp read through the notes, she had to admit that there wasn't any mention of her doing either duty in the record.

"It looks to be that way," she lamely admitted.

But she continued to claim that she did give grand jurors copies of the law.

"My recollection is we put that on the table," she said.

During the cross-examination of Tripp, Judge McDermott interrupted to admonish Tripp that in not giving the grand jurors the legal elements that constituted murder or manslaughter, "You're not giving them the tools to say which one" applied in the Pownall case.

"You didn't explain malice or intentional killing," the judge continued to admonish Tripp.

The problem was compounded when it came time to draw up an affidavit of probable cause that would indict Pownall for murder, the D.A.'s office relied on the faulty grand jury presentment.

When it came time for closing statements, Fred Perri, arguing on behalf of Pownall, said that "his [rights to] due process has been violated by someone's negligence."

That someone was clearly Tripp, who had just left the witness stand.

While Tripp claimed she had sought out senior prosecutors for advice, Perri sneered to the judge, "You know who's calling the shots over there," he said, referring to D.A. Krasner.

"The presentment must be quashed," Perri concluded.

When ADA Vince Corrigan was giving his closing argument, he made the mistake of saying if the defendant didn't like getting indicted for murder, he could always file an appeal the D.A.'s decision.

That's when Judge McDermott brought up another outrageous act by the D.A.'s office during the Pownall case, denying Pownall the former cop a preliminary hearing, where he would have had the chance to hear the evidence against him and confront his accusers.

"You didn't give them a preliminary hearing," the judge reminded ADA Corrigan. "How could they appeal?"

"He was entitled to a preliminary hearing," the judge said.

She also reminded Corrigan that the D.A.'s officer never informed the grand jurors of the law regarding justifiable use of force by a police officer.

"How could the grand jury do their job without knowing that?" she asked Corrigan.

McDermott was so disgusted with the D.A.'s office that she said if they were defense lawyers, "I would have declared them incompetent."

After the judge quashed the grand jury presentment, I asked Corrigan if it was time to give up on the Pownall case.

"Nope," he said.

At the close of the hearing, Corrigan and ADA Lyandra Retacco were talking about rearresting Pownall, only this time, the judge said, they'd better give him a preliminary hearing.

As they filed out of the courtroom, I asked Corrigan and Retacco about Pownall's right to a speedy trial, and if they had any idea how bad the D.A.'s office looked in Judge McDermott's courtroom.

Both Corrigan and Retacco replied by saying no comment.

That's when Dustin Slaughter, a spokesperson for the D.A.'s office who never talks to me, became enraged, charged toward me, while loudly criticizing my work as a reporter.

Slaughter, who had to be restrained and told to shut up by Corrigan and Rittacco, declined to elaborate on any of his criticisms of Big Trial's Krasner coverage.

Outside the courtroom, McMonagle and Perri described the Pownall case as a "travesty of justice" where the D.A.'s office under Krasner had used a corrupt grand jury process to "destroy a young man's life."

When told the D.A.'s was not prepared to throw in the towel on the case, Perri replied, "neither are we."

By Ralph Cipriano
for BigTrial.net

Effective today, Big Trial's moving to substack.com.

Why? Since Big Trial lost its sponsor seven years ago, I've been doing this blog pro bono.

And every year, not only has the workload steadily increased, but in my opinion, so has the need for this type of reporting.

Using the courts as a base of operations, Big Trial provides an independent voice in the local media by doing some essential muckraking, asking the tough questions, and always insisting on holding public officials accountable.

It's become indispensable journalism, I would argue, in a city that for the past two years has been setting historic records for shootings, murders and carjackings. City Council members who are still afraid to meet in public -- they only meet on Zoom -- openly admit that Philadelphia has descended into a state of lawlessness. And become a place where every day, armed and violent criminals brazenly go about their business, with no fear of consequences.

Against this desperate backdrop, our only daily newspaper, The Philadelphia Inquirer, where I once worked, continues to function as the official house organ of the Democratic Party that's controlled City Hall for the past 70 years, while shilling for the "progressive" leaders who have run Philadelphia into the ground.

At Big Trial, we do things differently. We aren't PC, we don't suffer fools gladly, and we don't believe in sacred cows.

What does the move to Substack mean for readers? Instead of getting Big Trial for free, now you'll have to pay $5 a month, which at Subbstack, is their lowest subscription rate. I hate having to ask people for money, but in a city that's in crisis, it's the cost to preserve independent journalism.

So consider this my invitation to readers to follow me over to Substack, where we'll continue to shine a bright light on the dark place that Philadelphia has become.

Latest Images