Internet Explorer 11 is not supported

For optimal browsing, we recommend Chrome, Firefox or Safari browsers.

Should Pennsylvania AG Have Dropped Sting Investigation?

To Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen Kane, it was "the deal of the century," fatally undermining the credibility of an undercover operative and the case he built.

To Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen Kane, it was "the deal of the century," fatally undermining the credibility of an undercover operative and the case he built.

 

To its supporters, it was a reasonable use of power that would not have hindered prosecutors' ability to go after at least five Philadelphia Democrats caught on tape pocketing money or gifts.

 

At issue is the "non-prosecution agreement" reached by former Chief Deputy Attorney General Frank G. Fina with operative Tyron B. Ali 45 days before Kane took office.

 

Rewarding Ali for his 19 months undercover, the agreement committed the Attorney General's Office to drop all charges against him in an alleged $430,000 rip-off of a program to feed poor children and the elderly.

 

In explaining why she decided not to pursue the sting investigation, Kane has said a key problem was that the deal with Ali, a confidential informant or "CI," was far too generous.

 

"You put that CI before the jury, and his credibility is shot," Kane said at a March 17 news conference. "Because the CI was tainted, those recordings may never have been allowed into court, and that prosecution would have failed. No doubt."

 

Kane's critics dispute that. They say prosecutors give good deals to bad people all the time and still try their cases in court - and win convictions.

 

At the news conference, Kane put the blame squarely on Fina for nolle prossing - dropping - the charges.

Caroline Cournoyer is GOVERNING's senior web editor.
Special Projects