Wednesday, May 24, 2017

Beth Grossman, GOP Candidate For D.A., Calls Larry Krasner's George Soros-Financed Campaign A "Grand Social Experiment"

Larry at his victory party ["F--k the FOP!"]
By Ralph Cipriano
for BigTrial.net

Only in Philadelphia where our incumbent District Attorney is currently under federal indictment for political corruption could the citizens be poised to make a worse choice as their next D.A.

That would be Larry Krasner, the George Soros-financed radical "progressive" who just won the Democratic primary for D.A. Now he's running for election this November in a town where Democrats outnumber Republicans 7 to 1.

Krasner is a longtime civil rights lawyer who has sued the Philadelphia Police Department 75 times, on behalf of drug dealers and protesters from groups such as Black Lives Matter, ACT UP and Occupy Philly.

Larry's the guy who talked our current corrupt D.A. into tossing more than 800 convictions of drug dealers, nearly all of whom had pleaded guilty after getting caught with drugs. For his next trick, Progressive Larry sued the city to gain cash rewards from the taxpayers that will ultimately benefit 300 newly emancipated drug dealers. The drug dealers are currently in magistrate court, eagerly awaiting those cash payouts arranged by their good friend Larry.

Larry's only remaining opponent, Beth Grossman
Krasner's the type of candidate whose supporters chant catchy phrases like "Fuck the FOP!" And "No good cops in a racist system."

Yes, Larry loves to defend drug dealers who poison our citizens and protesters who block our streets during rush hour. Larry's dedicated his life to emptying the jail cells of Philadelphia. But that crusade may turn out to be bad news for the rest of us.

"A grand social experiment" is how Beth Grossman, Krasner's GOP opponent, describes Krasner's campaign financed with more than $1 million of George Soros's money.

"We have one of the finest public defender's offices in the country," Grossman says. "We don't need two."

Krasner is a 56-year-old former public defender who wants to abolish cash bail and the civil asset forfeiture program. He could not be reached for comment.

"Larry is away on vacation until after Memorial Day," said his spokesman, Ben Waxman. "He's not doing any press interviews at all, including national outlets like the N.Y. Times, CNN, Fox News, and the L.A. Times."

Grossman, however, is not on vacation. She's a 49 year-old former assistant district attorney under Lynne Abraham who was a prosecutor for more than 20 years. She favors cash bail and formerly led the D.A.'s civil asset forfeiture program.

This week, Grossman had plenty of time to talk to Big Trial about the many shortcomings of our current incumbent D.A., Rufus Seth Williams, and the many dangers posed by the candidacy of Let-'em-Loose Larry.

Let's start with the case of those six former narcotics officers who were accused of beating and robbing a bunch of drug dealers. But they beat the rap when a jury in 2015 acquitted all six defendants on all 47 charges of a 26-count federal indictment.

Let's recap the role that Rufus Seth Williams played in that fiasco which is currently costing the taxpayers millions of dollars in legal fees to pay 10 lawyers from two private law firms to defend the city. And millions more when those 300 newly emancipated drug dealers cash in on Larry's lottery.

Rufus Seth Williams is the guy who wrote a letter to the police commissioner in 2012 announcing that without benefit of an investigation of any kind, he would no longer prosecute any drug cases brought by those narcotics officers. Rufus promptly leaked that letter to Fox 29. Then, Rufus let Larry Krasner talk him into letting more than 800 drug dealers previously arrested by the narcs go free.

Of the 800 convicted drug dealers freed by Larry and Rufus, I was able to track the criminal records of more than 400. Of the 400, more than 200 were subsequently re-arrested on charges that included rape, robbery, burglary, aggravated assault, aggravated assault with a gun, attempted murder and murder.

So thanks, Larry and Rufus for unleashing a crime wave on the citizens.

In a Feb. 22nd interview with fellow progressive Holly Otterbein of Philly Mag, Krasner claimed credit for talking Rufus into freeing 800 drug dealers.

Here's what Progressive Larry told Progressive Holly:

"I had a particular case in which a college student was charged with drug activity, and I filed a request, which went to the district attorney, the Police Commissioner, and all their top deputies demanding that they provide exculpatory information that would show what they knew about whether or not these officers were involved in lying under oath, stealing money, falsifying probable cause, backdating warrants, and things of that sort."

"The District Attorney's office vigorously resisted that request . . . Finally the judge says, 'No if you have it, you have to turn it over.' Then the District Attorney's office dropped the case against my client, basically, so they wouldn't have to turn the information over."

Sadly, Larry's wrong about one really important fact. The D.A.'s office under Rufus Seth Williams had no such evidence of police misconduct of any kind, not one document to turn over.

How do we know this? Because in court records, Public Defender Bradley S. Bridge made the same assumption that Krasner did, namely that if the D.A. was publicly trashing those cops, why the D.A.'s office must have been sitting on a mountain of evidence of police misconduct.

But here's what court documents filed by the public defender had to say about that subject:

"On Dec. 6, 20l2, Bradley S. Bridge, an attorney from the Defender’s Association of Philadelphia, wrote First Assistant District Attorney Edward McCann, Esquire, and formally requested, pursuant to Brady v. Maryland, material regarding the six officers contained in District Attorney Williams’ Dec. 3, l2 letter" [to the police commissioner] the public defenders wrote in a motion for a new trial.

"First Assistant [Edward] McCann verbally told Mr. Bridge that they were dismissing the cases because of prosecutorial discretion and that there was no Brady information," the public defenders wrote. "Attorney Bridge subsequently requested Brady material again and on Jan. 8, 20l3, First Assistant District Attorney McCann again denied being in possession of Brady material."

[Brady material refers to the landmark 1963 case, Brady v. Maryland, where the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that prosecutors must turn over any evidence that might benefit a defendant in a criminal trial.]

So there you have it folks, rampant misconduct on the part of Rufus, thanks in part to that bad advice he got from his good friend Larry. 

What does Beth Grossman have to say about the former narcs?

Larry's main benefactor, George Soros
"I didn't watch the trial; I can't speak to their guilt or innocence," she said. "I don't know enough to make an informed decision."

But she knows enough about the case to say that Rufus blew it.

"Making any determination about any case must and should always be based on what is the evidence," she said. "And whether there is evidence or whether there is no evidence. Or whether that evidence is illegally obtained."

"Everything has to be based upon evidence," Grossman repeated. "Listen if Seth Williams and his group made that decision based on what you are telling me was no evidence, and now they [the drug dealers] are being rewarded of for illegal activity, of course that is very upsetting."

"I was never privy to any of those decisions," she said. But "we have police officers who were tried and acquitted. And we have people who pleaded guilty [the drug dealers] in the middle of a huge opioid and heroin crisis, individuals that were arrested and pleaded guilty to this and are going to walk."

"It's incredibly devastating for the city of Philadelphia," she said. The drug dealers "have pleaded guilty" and in many cases were "in possession of a lot of drugs," Grossman said. Also, the "money seized from them that was to be forfeited was returned to them."

In his Philly mag interview, Krasner the racial provocateur dismissed the jury verdict in the narcotics officers' case as the actions of "an all white jury, which is drawn in federal court from Lancaster and Red Hill and a lot of other places where Donald Trump is a popular guy."

No wonder The Philadelphia Tribune refers to Larry as the "Blackest white D.A. candidate ever."

But I covered that trial and that verdict wasn't about race, it was all about the evidence. Or lack thereof. The federal prosecutors put on the worst case I've ever seen. They relied on wild stories told by a crooked cop and 19 over-rehearsed drug dealers who used the same catch phrases. 

And here's what mattered to the jury: every time the prosecutors had a chance to corroborate any of those wild stories with evidence, they failed to do so.

The result: a unanimous jury verdict that blew out all the charges in a RICO case. The prosecution case, the foreman told me was "absolutely nothing."

"It almost got to the point where you almost wanted to make jokes about it," the jury foreman said. When it came time to deliberate, "I could have been out of there in 10 minutes. That's how easy it was."

In his Philly mag interview, Progressive Larry was proud of his role in arranging that lottery for the 300 freed drug dealers:

"My law firm and I were selected to be chief counsel for the plaintiffs," Krasner told Philly mag. So we are effectively the tip of the spear in terms of dealing with the civil cases against these individual officers and the city of Philadelphia."

Sadly, the people getting shafted by that spear are the taxpayers, who not only have to pay millions of dollars to hire 10 private lawyers to defend the city, but also millions more in payouts to the 300 drug dealers.

Nice work, Rufus and Larry.

I asked Grossman what she thought of some other travesties emanating from our current D.A.'s office. Such as a South Philly bank robbery where the cops caught the perp inside the bank trying to break into the vault, all of which was caught on video. But the prosecutors in the D.A.'s office declined to press charges.

"I have no idea why you would not charge that case," Grossman said. "I find that incredibly befuddling."

I asked Grossman about how she would handle domestic violence cases in the wake of our current district attorney going soft on abusers. In case you missed it, as the D.A. was gearing up for reelection, before he got hit with that federal indictment, the prosecutors in his charging unit were declining to prosecute cases where the D.A. stood a chance of losing. So the D.A. could brag to voters about his really high conviction rate.

The most prominent type of case that the D.A.'s office under Rufus Seth Williams was declining to prosecute: domestic violence. On this blog we documented cases where victims were stabbed, shot, and strangled into unconsciousness. The cops had arrested suspects. And the D.A.'s office under Rufus Seth Williams wouldn't prosecute, no matter how brutal the crime.

But then, in an abrupt about-face, Deputy District Attorney Michael Barry, the head of the D.A.'s charging unit, sent an email to the cops announcing that he was issuing a new policy directive aimed at putting the ADAs in the charging unit in a position where they would "feel more comfortable charging difficult cases."

Grossman was stunned by that quote from Barry's email to the cops.

"More comfortable?" she said. "That is our job. If you're not comfortable" charging a suspect in a domestic violence case, she said, "You should not be a district attorney."

"Domestic violence is one of the most serious crises that we face," Grossman said. "If this was done to improve stats for reelection purposes he [D.A. Williams] has destroyed what it means to be district attorney."

"The integrity has to be restored to that office," Grossman said. "The public deserves better."

Larry's biggest fans
If elected, her goal would be "regaining the public's trust," she said. In the 160 year history of the Philadelphia D.A.'s office according to Grossman, there has never been a D.A. who got indicted. Until Seth Williams came along.

Morale in that office is in the tank," Grossman said. "They need a proper leader, someone who respects what they do. And Mr. Krasner does not."

Nine people were shot this weekend alone in Philadelphia, Grossman said. The victims included a one-year-old sitting outside on a porch.

"My fear is that he [Krasner] will not embrace what it means to be a prosecutor," Grossman said. "I don't understand how you can change your mindset after being a defense attorney" for so many years.

So there you have it folks,  quite a clear-cut choice for our next District Attorney.

If you're a drug dealer or a member of Black Lives Matter, or if you just hate cops, vote for Larry.

And if you're somebody who worries about the safety of your family, and the carnage Larry might cause while he's emptying the jail cells of Philadelphia, vote for Beth Grossman for D.A.

Because the only thing worse than having a criminal as D.A. would be replacing him with a radical anti-cop advocate who's dedicated his life to freeing as many criminals as possible.

Ralph Cipriano can be reached at ralph@bigtrial.net.

11 comments:

  1. Larry is bought and paid for ....

    ReplyDelete
  2. Ralph, How did things get so out of hand at the DA's office, why was Seth Williams not charging criminals, was it racial or just that he did not want the police to look like they were doing their jobs, did he need to do what he did to make the feds narc case look stronger? Or was it that his office looked weaker ?

    Is there no safety net set up that prosecutors in the DA's office can voice concerns with the DA instead of making the entire office look like they were part of the problem as it does to the public right now.

    Are you saying that Kasner and Williams have the same agenda and both handled problems similarly even though one was a prosecutor and one a defense attorney ?

    As a faithful reader of your blog, I feel as though this is not making sense to me, what am I missing? How could a defense attorney influence the DA, I am only asking because I don't understand how Williams would take orders from anyone.

    I have never had an issue with a police officer but I am sure there are others that can say they have and I am sure others that can say it was because of race ,which we should not minimize their struggles. Nor am I a drug user or dealer and feel the release of the 800 drug offenders has already takens its toll on society and will continue to do so but taking the side of the police at every instance is the same as taking the prosecution side in all cases.

    Each case needed to be weighed individually not the complete dismissal of all the cases, which I think was not the correct way to handle it as drug dealers that committed crimes did hit the lottery.

    My fear also is that a prosecutor would not be able change their mindset as well and we will see more Monsignor Lynn cases where truth was hidden and innocents are sent to jail. I fear as well that prosecutors are not seekers of truth but seekers of a conviction at all costs, no free society can tolerate the actions Williams and Sorensen took to portray the four defendants in this case as villains.

    Williams indictment helped shape this election,people want reform or at best, change. I did not vote for Kasner but I can see how he was elected. Everyone needs to be fearful of a DA that does not prosecute crimes the way Williams obviously instructed his office to do but I am equally as frightened of a DA who invents crimes for his own advancement. We have all suffered under William's reign.

    What is the remedy as the office is set up for prosecutors to win at all costs as they seem to hold more sway over public opinion, if a prosecutor says a crime was committed we had previously believed them without question, now its hard to have any faith in anything they say as it would appear to be self serving. Having trust in the office has been diminished for me by the actions of overzealous prosecutors which now seems now to be the on the way to undermining the office.

    Make no mistake,criminals need to be caught and punished and I would not underestimate the danger policing entails, I could not do their jobs but am extremely grateful that there are men and women that put their lives on the line everyday for our safety. Doing a good job in the judicial sector means going after the bad guys, taking them off the streets to insure public protection whether you are a police officer or a prosecutor.

    People are influenced to vote by their life experiences or what they read and agree with in the media. Kasners election is telling us something , I do not think it's so much his views,but the corruption we feel exists in the justice departments nationwide, how many more innocents can we read about being released from prison after serving almost a lifetime for a crime they did not commit. Restoring integrity and justice for all has to be a earned, we can see how Williams actions and inactions impacted our city adversely .

    Thanks for the article, thanks for helping us all to make informed decisions, and thanks for shedding light on articles we would never read anywhere else.



    ReplyDelete
  3. And therein lies the problem. The Inquirer and the rest of the media are not covering any of this stuff. Only I am.

    They have not covered the complete unraveling the Billy Doe case, and have not written one word about Detective Joe Walsh coming forward to detail prosecutorial misconduct in the DA's office in his recent 12-page affidavit.

    They did not cover the DA failing to charge the bank robbery suspect caught inside the bank. They didn't cover the DA failing to charge domestic violence cases and they failed to cover the memo where the DA reversed course.

    They did not care that the DA had no evidence to accuse those narcotics officers of misconduct. They did not cover the lottery awarded the drug dealers, nor Larry Krasner's involvement in it.

    Seth didn't take orders from Larry, but he apparently, according to Larry, bought his idea to start dismissing cases wholesale.

    If the media was all over this stuff, it wouldn't be happening. But the Inquirer sticks to what the prosecutors feed them. So that's why they continued to trash those narcotics officers in the news columns and on the editorial page, even after a jury had acquitted them on all 47 charges on all 26 counts of that RICO indictment.

    The Inquirer is completely biased in favor of prosecutors. Unless they get indicted by other prosecutors.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And the rest of the media in this town takes their cues from the Inky. And exhibits little independent thought, certainly when it comes to the unpublicized events I listed above.

      Delete
  4. I agree, if for instance the bank story was run in the Inky,there would have been public outrage. Unless they were not aware of the story soon after it happened which would make the paper look bad for not reporting in a timely fashion, though being caught red handed is hard to discount and should have been brought to our attention.

    The only two reasons that I can surmise, is that the Inky do not believe the police and will not print anything that makes them look successful or that they were taking instructions from Seth Williams, the prosecution.

    If the Inky does not want to show the police in a favorable light at any cost, then we are all in deep trouble, must we be subjected to the feds and Inky still reeling from the loss of the narc trial.

    Too bad when it comes to crime they do not, as I have suggested before, use a disclaimer above an article given to them by the prosecution saying as we see in so many publications, these are not the views of the Inky but the prosecution's views. This would make it possible for the Inky to report facts as they unfold, actual facts not the prosecution's"facts".

    Then do some research into a story before an article is written, if they feel the need to comment, not just jump on the prosecution band wagon.

    The public is not that starved for a instant reaction from the Inky, we want the facts from both sides to be based on actual facts not accusations by the prosecution.

    The most serious ill I see in the press is the daily bashing of politicians, the media has made them the enemy of the people, we have to find common ground between legislators and the press and the justice department and the press. We are so far off center that's it's damaging our national views as well as our moral compass.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't think "daily bashing of politicians" by the press is the problem at all. I think the press is generally lazy, showing up late to the party. They should have been questioning and bashing Seth Williams in 2009 when he was in court explaining his campaign finance problems instead of endorsing him.

      Whether you like Krasner or not, the failure of the press to act as a check on government is what opened the door for him.

      Daily bashing of Seth Williams (before he attained lame duck status) might actually have led to reforms or a challenger in 2013.

      Delete
  5. There is a difference here, politicians as a whole are treated like self serving pariah by society,they are subjected to insults, accusations, and scorn daily.They come in somewhere below used car salesmen ( sorry used car salesman).

    They live under constant scrutiny, every minute of every day is occupied by constituents concerns,as it should be, but when you do your best it's still not good enough. Politicians are never given enough credit for their efforts.

    People think nothing of interrupting family time to complain about a situation that you may not have any control over. Most citizen would not survive in a politician's skin, or the microscope their families have to live under.

    My comment focused on the way politicians are perceived, not many people think highly of them, there are those that deserve the scorn, not all or not most, but they all face the same discrimination as if they committed a crime or were responsible for all the ills of society.

    Seth Williams deserved everything that is coming his way, not sure the media did much to highlight his failures, I agree, also not sure who was responsible for bringing it to our attention. If not for this blog,we would not know what went on, his inability to run the DA's office with integrity should have been made public long before his finances were the talk of the day.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You'll have to forgive us for not thinking highly of politicians, considering how many are, were, or will be in jail. Geez.

      If you don't want to be a public servant, don't. If you do, expect scrutiny. And if you want to sell your office, expect jail. Real simple.

      Delete
  6. If you don't want to be a public servant don't do it, makes sense, most people have no interest in being in office or living their lives in the public eye or just don't care to be involved. But someone has to be elected to hold office, it's how our government is set up. Those that care enough to want to fight for what they believe in and to help their communities become better places to live, do expect scrutiny.

    What they don't expect to be treated unjustly by their fellow citizens for no reason other than the job they hold. As Abraham Lincoln said " You can please some of the people all of the time, you can please all of the people some of the time, but you can't please all of the people all of the time".

    Giving your all is never good enough, working tirelessly is never good enough, as is trying to be fair which is never good enough.

    Politician do not have a corner on going to jail, jails are filled with lawyers, doctors and business people. What politicians should expect is respect and support for doing a thankless job, and yes if you sell your office you should be in jail , sounds real simple to me as well, just as a business person who cheats the public or a lawyer who steals from a client or a doctor who defrauds the government or any other endless possibilities.

    Corruption is a crime, but acting like it's second nature for politicians is an unjust statement to make.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Isn't it true that the city played out $777,000.00 in lawsuits from narcotic officers by 2009?That was a few years before the officers were arrested.

    This would show that the city knew about the actions of these officers. But still allowed them to remain in the narcotic division.In turn is signs of neglect by the city for allowing them to continue to arrest people for drugs.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Settlements paid by the city has no reflection on the behavior of an officer. Every lawyer knows that the city pays. It's just cheaper than the legal fees associated with fighting it. Sadly, being a criminal really does pay in the City of Brotherly Love.

    ReplyDelete

Thoughtful commentary welcome. Trolling, harassing, and defaming not welcome. Consistent with 47 U.S.C. 230, we have the right to delete without warning any comments we believe are obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected.

 

Big Trial | Philadelphia Trial Blog Copyright © 2016 BigTrial.net

Privacy Policy: BigTrial.net does not distribute, share or sell email addresses, or any other personal information received from this website.