Allegheny County DA Stephen A. Zappala Jr. claims victory over challenger Lisa Middleman | TribLIVE.com
Allegheny

Allegheny County DA Stephen A. Zappala Jr. claims victory over challenger Lisa Middleman

Natasha Lindstrom
1904056_web1_ptr-election21-110519
District Attorney Stephen A. Zappala Jr. celebrates his victory over Independent Lisa Middleman at an event at Cupka’s Cafe II on the South Side on Tuesday, Nov. 5, 2019.
1904056_web1_ptr-election19-110519
District Attorney Stephen A. Zappala Jr. celebrates his victory over independent challenger Lisa Middleman at an event at Cupka’s Cafe II on Pittsburgh’s South Side on Tuesday, Nov. 5, 2019.

Allegheny County District Attorney Stephen A. Zappala Jr. claimed a 14 percentage point win Tuesday against his second serious challenger in two decades, unofficial election results showed.

Zappala, 62, a Democrat from Fox Chapel, collected 56.8% of the votes cast, while independent candidate Lisa Middleman garnered 43%, unofficial results showed around 11:45 p.m. with 98.6 of the county’s precincts reporting. More than 35,000 votes separated the candidates.

About 45 minutes earlier, Zappala shook hands and posed for photos with a few dozen supporters at an election night party at Cupka’s II Cafe along East Carson Street in Pittsburgh’s South Side neighborhood.

“This aspect of energy government never stops. There’s always something that needs to be done, and the challenge is what is really rewarding,” Zappala told the Tribune-Review about what another reelection means to him.

He said his top priorities in the term ahead include equipping more police officers with body cameras, making better use of technology among police departments countywide and continuing to increase the use of diversion programs and alternatives to prison time such as drug treatment programs for certain offenses and offenders.

“We have to get body cams on every police department in Allegheny County,” Zappala said. “There’s a lot of discussion around transparency.”

He boasted that Allegheny County already has the most diversion programs of all 67 counties statewide.

The county files about 45,000 cases a year, mostly involving misdemeanors, but many of those cases shouldn’t end up in court, Zappala said.

“In my opinion, there’s still too many cases that are charged,” he said.

Zappala cited the need for the county at large to provide resources and solutions for cash-strapped municipal agencies that can’t afford full-time police. He suggested that the county police consider developing a lower-cost patrol unit to help.

“As a practical matter, Rankin, Braddock, North Braddock, Braddock Hills, they can’t afford to police. And they’ve got real crime,” Zappala said. “So we have to have intelligent discussions about having some kind of mechanism that is cohesive.”

Middleman, 57, a county public defender, was the second candidate to try to topple the longtime incumbent’s tenure this year.

Turahn Jenkins challenged Zappala in the Democratic primary in May. Jenkins, who left his post as the chief deputy director of the county public defender’s office to enter the race, took about 40% of the vote.

No Republican competed in the race.

Natasha Lindstrom is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Natasha at 412-380-8514, [email protected] or via Twitter .

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 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.