Kane gives Philly DA case file for abandoned legislative sting
HARRISBURG — After more than three weeks of sniping between Attorney General Kathleen Kane and Philadelphia District Attorney Seth Williams, Kane's agents on Wednesday delivered evidence from an abandoned legislative sting case to Williams' office, aides said.
“Evidence was transferred this afternoon,” said J.J. Abbott, Kane's spokesman.
Tasha Jamerson, a spokeswoman for Williams, said the file hadn't been “inventoried” so it is not known whether it includes everything Williams sought.
Kane on April 4 told him he could have the case that she declined to prosecute. Williams asked for internal documents and email as well as evidence.
Williams has said he'll review the case in which five Philadelphia officials, including four legislators, were recorded taking cash and jewelry by an undercover informant for the Attorney General's Office from 2010 through 2012.
Kane said the case didn't pass legal muster. She claimed there had possible targeting of black lawmakers.
Former prosecutors and an agent who supervised the case now work for Williams. They denied any racism, as did Williams, the first black district attorney in Pennsylvania.
Brad Bumsted is Trib Total Media's state Capitol reporter. He can be reached at 717-787-1405 or firstname.lastname@example.org.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.