137 m m2014 order and attachments - 004672

8/20/2019 137 M M2014 Order and Attachments - 004672

1/61

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

IN RE: THE THIRTY-FIFTH STATEWIDE

INVESTIGATING GRAND JURY

PETITION OF: OFFICE OF ATTORNEYGENERAL

:

:::::

No. 137 MM 2014

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 26th day of August, 2015, upon the request of the supervising

judge for removal of the seal from all matters involving the 35th

Statewide Investigating

Grand Jury and the investigation of Attorney General Kathleen Kane which have been

lodged in this Court, save for grand jury materials such as testimony, exhibits, and in

camera proceedings, and based on the supervising judge’s assurance that there are no

present grand jury secrecy concerns relative to such unsealing, it is hereby ORDERED

that the seal is lifted, in part, upon such terms.


2/61

Received 09/19/2014

Supreme

Court

Middle

D i s t r i c

F i l e d 09/19/2014

Supreme

Court

Middle

D i s t r i c

137 MM 0 1 4

IN

THE

SUPREMECOURT

OF

PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE

ISTRICT

IN

RE:

THE

HIRTY-FIFTH STATEWIDE

INVESTIGATINGGRAND

JURY

No. MM 014

PETITION

OF:

FILED

UNDER

SEAL

OFFICEOF

ATTORNEY

GENERAL

APPLICATION

OF

THEOFFICE

OF

ATTORNEY GENERALFOR

SPECIAL RELIEF

PURSUANTTO

2 a.C.S.

§§ 502,

726, a.R.A.P.

3309

TO THE HONORA.BLE

CHIEF JUSTICE

AND

USTICES OF

THE SUPREMECOURT

OF

PENNSYLVANIA:

AND NOW,

omes the Pennsylvania O f f i c e

of

A t t o r n e y General

by Kathleen

G . K a n e ,

Attorney

General

of h e

Commonwealth

of Pennsylvania, and James P. B a r k e r ,

Chief

Deputy

Attorney General, w h o

f i l e s

t h i s

A p p l i c a t i o n o f

h e O f f i c e of

Attorney General

o r

S p e c i a l R e l i e f

pursuant o 4 2 a.C.S.§§ 502,726, aA.A.P. 3309,

n d

n s u p p o r t t h e r e o f a v e r s a s f o l l o w s :

I .

PARTIES

1 .

P e t i t i o n e r

i s

t h e

O f f i c e

of

A t t o r n e y

General

of

t h e

C ommo nwe a l t h

of

Pennsylvania

(OAG)

y K a t h l e e n

K a n e ,

t t o r n e y

General,

and

h e r a p p o i n t e d

d e p u t i e s .

UNSEALED PER ORDER OF

THE COURT DATED

AUGUST 26, 2015


3/61

2 .

For

h e r e a s o n s

r e c i t e d below,

OAG s

unaware

of h e

i d e n t i t y of

a n y

Respondent

but i s

s e r v i n g t h e S p e c i a l P r o s e c u t o r

and

t h e S u p e r v i s i n g

Judge a s

p o t e n t i a l l y i n t e r e s t e d p a r t i e s ,

a s well a s the Clerk

of

Court

of

Montgomery

County.

See Pa.R.A.P. 3 3 0 9 ( a ) .

I I . JURISDICTION

3 .

The Court has j u r i s d i c t i o n under S e c t i o n 726

of t h e

J u d i c i a l

Code,

which

p r o v i d e s :

N o t w i t h s t a n d i n g a n y

o t h e r

p r o v i s i o n

of

law,

h e

Supreme

Court m a y ,

on

i t s own

motion

o r upon p e t i t i o n of a n y p a r t y , i n a n y m a t t e r pending b e f o r e a n y

c o u r t

or m a g i s t e r i a l d i s t r i c t judge of h i s Commonwealth

i n v o l v i n g

a n

i s s u e

of

immediate

p u b l i c

importance,

assume

p l e n a r y j u r i s d i c t i o n

of

such

m a t t e r

a t

an y

s t a g e t h e r e o f

and

e n t e r

a

f i n a l

o r d e r

o r

o t h e r w i s e

cause

r i g h t

and

j u s t i c e t o

be

done.

4 2

a . C . S .

§

26.

Reasons o r

e x e r c i s i n g

t h i s

d i s c r e t i o n a r y

j u r i s d i c t i o n

a r e d i s c u s s e d below.

I I I .

BACKGROUND

4.

n June 6, 2014,

h e

P h i l a d e l p h i a Daily News p u b l i s h e d a n a r t i c l e , a

copy

of

b e

o n - l i n e

v e r s i o n

of

which i s

a t t a c h e d

a s

Appendix A , e s c r i b i n g a review of

a

p r i o r

Grand J u r y

i n v e s t i g a t i o n

b y

OAG.

5 . The

Honorable William

R.

C a r p e n t e r ,

S u p e r v i s i n g

Judge of

t h e

T h i r t y - F i f t h

Statewide

I n v e s t i g a t i n g Grand J u r y ,

appointed a

S p e c i a l . P r o s e c u t o r t o

i n v e s t i g a t e ,

u s i n g t h e

r e s o u r c e s of he


Statewide

n v e s t i g a t i n g

Grand u r y .

6. OAG

as

o o p e r a t e d w i t h t h e S p e c i a l P r o s e c u t o r ' s

i n v e s t i g a t i o n .

7 . On

August

26,

2014„

with

n o p r i o r

n o t i c e t o OAG,

o a l l e g a t i o n s

c o n t a i n e d

t h e r e i n , a nd n o o p p o r t u n i t y f o r OAG

t o

Tespond

t o

a n y

a l l e g a t i o n s of

misconduct,

t h e

S u p e r v i s i n g Judge

i s s u e d

an Order under

t h e

a u t h o r i t y of 18

Pa.C.S.

§ 4954

( r e l a t i n g

t o

p r o t e c t i v e o r d e r s ) , i d e n t i f i e d h e r e i n a f t e r a s the

P r o t e c t i v e

Order,

a

copy

of which

along with a

r e l a t e d Sealing Order) s

a t t a c h e d h e r e t o

a s Appendix B.

2


4/61

8 .

OAG moved f o r r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n of

t h e

P r o t e c t i v e Order and argument on t h e

motion was conducted

o n

September

16, 2014.

9. A t

h e

time

of

rgument,

OAG a s

informed

f o r t h e

f i r s t

time t h a l a n ex p a r t e , i n

camera hearing had been conducted and t h a t

t h e

P r o t e c t i v e

Order

a g a i n s t

t h e

government

agency had i s s u e d

a s

a c s u h .

1 0 . On

September

17,

2014, h e S u p e r v i s i n g

Judge

i s s u e d

a n

Order

g r a n t i n g

i n

p a r t

t h e

OAG motion f o r r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n ,

g r a n t i n g

a h e a r i n g on a l l e g a t i o n s

of

o b s t r u c t i o n , w i t n e s s

i n t i m i d a t i o n ,

a n d / o r

r e t a l i a t i o n ,

but not s t a b l i s h i n g a a t e f o r s a i d

h e a r i n g .

A opy

of

h i s Order

and

r e l a t e d

S e a l i n g

Order

s

a t t a c h e d

h e r e t o

a s

Appendix

C.

11. The Order

of

September 17, 2014, i d

not

p e c i f y

a n y

p e r s o n o r

conduct h a t i s a t

i s s u e , r e c i t i n g

o n l y ,

The s u b j e c t

of t h e

h e a r i n g i s a l l e g a t i o n s of o b s t r u c t i o n ,

w i t n e s s

i n f i n a i d a t i o n , a n d / o r

r e t a l i a t i o n .

Order of ourt

a t e d

September 17, 2014, t 1 .

12. Also

o i l September

17, 2014, h e S u p e r v i s i n g

Judge

i s s u e d a

second

Order g r a n t i n g

i n

p a r t

t h e

OAG s motion

f o r r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n , amending Paragraphs

2 nd

5 of t h e

o r i g i n a l

P r o t e c t i v e

Order o make

h e

f o l l o w i n g persons

u b j e c t

t o Paragraphs 2 n d 5 :

1 . A n y

p e r s o n

w h o has

been

sworn o C i r a n d

J u r y

s e c r e c y ;

2. A n y person w h o

has

o r had a c c e s s t o any Grand J u r y i n f o r m a t i o n ;

3 . Any erson a s s o c i a t e d with t h e

J .

Whyatt

Mondesire proceedings

a n d

i r y v e s t i g a t i o n

Order of Court

d a t e d

September 17, 2014 (second such

O r d e r ) , a t

1 .

P r e s e n t l y , t h e

P r o t e c t i v e

Order

a f f e c t s , a s i n p l a c e , hundreds of employees

of

a government agency, i n c l u d i n g

t h e

A t t o r n e y

General.

13. For t h e r e a s o n s d e t a i l e d below, OAG e s p e c t f t d l y r e q u e s t s t h a t t h i s Honorable

Court

n t e r

an Order

v a c a t i n g

t h e P r o t e c t i v e Order,

t

l e a s t t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t t h e OAG n d / o r

a n y

p e r s o n of

h e

p e r s o n s i d e n t i f i e d

i n t h e

second Order

of

September

1 7 ,

2014.

a r e

p r o h i b i t e d

from

3


5/61

a c t s

t h a t may be c o n s i d e r e d t o

c o n s t i t u t e

o b s t r u c t i o n , i n t i m i d a t i o n ,

o r

r e t a l i a t i o n a g a i n s t

a

w i t n e s s

summoned b y t h e Grand J u r y , t h e

i d e n t i t i e s

of

whom

OAG

s o r d e r e d

not t o have

knowledge.

IV.TERMSOFTHEPROTECTIVEORDER

1 4 . As

o t e d , on

August 27 2014,. h e S u p e r v i s i n g Judge i s s u e d t h e P r o t e c t i v e

Order

pursuant

t o

18 P a . C . S .

§4954,

which

p e r m i t s

l a l n y c o u r t

w i t h


over

a n y

c r i r n i n a l matter o i s s u e

p r o t e c t i v e

o r d e r s

a f t e r a h e a r i n g and i n

i t s d i s c r e t i o n ,

upon

s u b s t a n t i a l

e v i d e n c e .

1 5 ,

The

P r o t e c t i v e

Order

d i r e c t s

OA Ci

t o

r e f r a i n

from

involvement

i n o r

a c c e s s t o

t h e

i n v e s t i g a t i v e e f f o r t s

of

h e S p e c i a l P r o s e c u t o r . P r o t e c t i v e

Order

a t 1 ¶ .

1 6 . The

P r o t e c t i v e

Order, as

o r i g i n a l l y

i s s u e d ,

a l s o

r e q u i r e s a l l

OAG

mployees,

approximately

800

p e o p l e ,

t o r e f r a i n

from

engaging i n

o r

s o l i c i t i n g o b s t r u c t i o n ,

i n t i m i d a t i o n

o r

r e t a l i a t i o n a g a i n s t a n y w i t n e s s summoned

b y

t h e

Grand Jury i n

t h e

S p e c i a l . P r o s e c u t o r ' s


P r o t e c t i v e

Order a t 1 T d

2 .

17. The P r o t e c t i v e

Order

c a u t i o n s t h a t a n y

p e r s o n ,

i n c l u d i n g OAG

mployees,

who

ngages

i n

conduct

c o n s t i t u t i n g

o b s t r u c t i o n , i n t i m i d a t i o n , or r e t a l i a t i o n may e

p r o s e c u t e d

under 18 Pa.C.S.

§

955 and a n y

o t h e r a p p l i c a b l e p r o v i s i o n

of

h e

Crimes Code.

P r o t e c t i v e

Order a t 2

.

18. The Order p r o h i b i t s

t h e O f f i c e from r e c e i v i n g t r a n s c r i p t s of estimony b e f o r e t h e

Grand J u r y a nd

b a r s

employees

of h e O f f i c e from a c c e s s t o

t r a n s c r i p t s , documents,

o r o t h e r

infomation

r e l a t e d

t h

t h e

S p e c i a l P r o s e c u t o r ' s


P r o t e c t i v e Order a t

1

¶

,2 1 4 .

4


6/61

1 9 . The

S p e c i a l

P r o s e c u t o r

was

d i r e c t e d t o

s e r v e

t h e

P r o t e c t i v e Order o n OAG,

P r o t e c t i v e Order a t

2

f

6, lthough t h e

P r o t e c t i v e Order

d i d

not p r o v i d e

f o r

s e r v i c e o n

a l l

of

h e

persons u b j e c t

t o

i t s

t e r m s .

20.

F i n a l l y t h e

Order

p r o h i b i t s

t h e

d i s c l o s u r e

of

t s

c o n t e n t s t o

anyone

o u t s i d e

OAG,

under

p e n a l t y

of contempt.

21.

As

mended

b y

t h e

Orders

of S e p t e r n b e r 1 7 ,

2014,

h e

P r o t e c t i v e

Order

n o w

allows f o r

t h e

s c h e d u l i n g of

a

h e a r i n g on f a c t s

a s

t o

which

t h e r e

a l r e a d y

have been

f i n d i n g s ,

pursuant

t o

a n

ex p a r t e

h e a r i n g

a s t o

which

OAG

a s

n o t

provided

i t s due

p r o c e s s

r i g h t s

o f

n o t i c e

and

r e p r e s e n t a t i o n ,

and has

l i m i t e d

t h e

number

of

persons

s u b j e c t

t o

t h e P r o t e c t i v e

Order

t o a n y

person s u b j e c t t o

Grand

J u r y

s e c r e c y , a n y

p e r s o n

who

as o r had

a c c e s s t o Grand

jury

i n f o r m a t i o n ,

and

any

p e r s o n

i n v o l v e d i n a s p e c i f i e d i nv e s t i g a t i o n . The

people

covered

by


Order t i l l

would

number n

t h e

hundreds.

V. BUSEOF

DISCRETION

IN

ISSUANCEOF

IIE

PROTECTIVE

ORDER

22.

The

t a t u t o r y

p r o v i s i o n

on

which

t h e


Judge

e l i e d

r e a d s

p s

f o l l o w s :

A n y

c o u r t with j u r i s d i c t i o n over

a n y

c r i m i n a l

m a t t e r

may,

f t e r

a h e a r i n g

a nd

i n

i t s

d i s c r e t i o n ,

upon

s u b s t a n t i a l

evidence,

which

r n a y

i n c l u d e h e a r s a y o r

t h e

d e c l a r a t i o n

of

t h e

p r o s e c u t o r t h a t a

w i t n e s s

o r

v i c t i m has

been

i n t i m i d a t e d

o r

i s

r e a s o n a b l y

l i k e l y

t h

be

i n t i m i d a t e d , i s s u e

p r o t e c t i v e o r d e r s , i n c l u d i n g , but not i m i t e d

t o ,

h e

f o l l o w i n g :

( 1 ) An r d e r t h a t

a

defendant

not v i o l a t e a n y

p r o v i s i o n of

t h i s s u b c h a p t e r o r

s e c t i o n 2709

r e l a t i n g

t o harassment) r

2709.1

r e l a t i n g

t o

s t a l k i n g ) .

( 2 )An

r d e r

t h a t

a p e r s o n

o t h e r

t h a n t h e

d e f e n d a n t ,

i n c l u d i n g , but

n o t

l i m i t e d t o ,

a

subpoenaed

w i t l e s s ,

not v i o l a t e

a n y p r o v i s i o n of

h i s

s u b c h a p t e r .

(3) An r d e r

t h a t a n y

p e r s o n

d e s c r i b e d

i n

paragraph

( 1 ) o r

(2)

m a i n t a i n a

p r e s c r i b e d

geographic d i s t a n c e from a n y s p e c i f i e d

w i t n e s s

o r

v i c t i m .

( 4 )

An o r d e r t h a t a n y

person d e s c r i b e d

i n

p a r a g r a p h (1) o r ( 2 ) have n o

communication

whatsoever

with a n y

s p e c i f i e d

w i t n e s s

o r

v i c t i m ,

except

through

a n a t t o r n e y under

such

r e a s o n a b l e

r e s t r i c t i o n s a s t h e c o u r t m a y

r n p o s e .

5


7/61

18 Pa.C.S.§ 954.

23.

By t s

t e r m s , §

954

g r a nt s t o t h e c o u r t with

u r i s d i c t i o n

t h e

d i s c r e t i o n

t o

e n t e r

a

p r o t e c t i v e

o r d e r

and

t o d e c i d e

the terms of

a

p r o t e c t i v e

o r d e r ,

such t h a t review

of a

p r o t e c t i v e

o r d e r

would be

f o r

an abuse

of

i s c r e t i o n . See Commonwealth v

Sandusky, 70

A.3d 886, 897

n . 9

(Pa.

Super.

2013).

24.

An'abuse of i s c r e t i o n

w i l l

not be found based on

a

mere e r r o r

of

udgment, but

r a t h e r

e x i s t s

where t h e c o u r t

has

reached

a o n c l u s i o n which

o v e r r i d e s o r

r n i s a p p l i e s

t h e law, o r

where

t h e judgrnent

e x e r c i s e d

i s m a n i f e s t l y u n r e a s o n a b l e ,

o r

t h e r e s u l t

of

a r t i a l i t y , p r e j u d i c e ,

b i a s

o r

i l l - w i l l .

Commonwealth

A l i c i a ,

92

.3d 753,

760

Pa.

2014)

c i t a t i o n

o m i t t e d ) .

25. To h e e x t e n t

t h a t

t h i s c a s e p r e s e n t s

a

q u e s t i o n of

law,

such a s t h e requirement of

a

e a r i n g ,

t h c

C o u r t ' s

s t a n d a r d of

review

i s

de novo and

h e

scope

of

review s

p l e n a r y .

I d .

26. As o t e d , OAG a s not

p r o v i d e d w i t h

n o t i c e t h a t t h e r e had been a n

a l l e g a t i o n

of

misconduct

a n d / o r r e q u e s t f o r i s s u a n c e

of

h e P r o t e c t i v e O r d e r .

27.

' l b

d a t e , d e s p i t e the

f i l i n g

o f a

motion

f o r

r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n ,

argument

on t h a t

motion on September 16, 2014,.and i s s u a n c e of

h e

Orders amending t h e P r o t e c t i v e

Order,

OACI

i s unaware

of h e p r e c i s e n a t u r e of n y a l l e g a t i o n

of

misconduct

g i v i n g r i s e t o t h e i s s u a n c e

of h e

P r o t e c t i v e

Order.

28.

A f t e r

r e p e a t e d r e q u e s t s b y OAG,

h e S u p e r v i s i n g

Judge r e f u s e d t o even inform

OAG

f

h e

a l l e g a t i o ns t h a t

form t h e

b a s i s

of h e

P r o t e c t i v e Order o r t h e person

o r

p e r s o n s who

a l l e g e d l y

committed

h e

un k n own

a c t s .

29. As such,

OAO

as

been

l e f t t o

s p e c u l a t e t h a t the

i n c i d e n t

g i v i n g

r i s e

t o

t h e

P r o t e c t i v e

Order was a n encotmter between two

w i t n e s s e s w h o t e s t i f i e d b e f o r e t h e C i r a n d

J u r y

and

a g e n t s employed

b y DAG.

6


8/61

30:

More s p e c i f i c a l l y ,

because

OAG was

r e s p o n s i b l e f o r i s s u i n g subpoenas t o

w i t n e s s e s summoned

b e f o r e

t h e Grand J u r y ,

c e r t a i n

members of h e Criminal

Law

i v i s i o n

were

aware

t h a t

two former employ ees

of

OAG, rank G . F i n a , E s q u i r e , and

F. M ar c

Costanzo,

E s q u i r e , e s t i f i e d b e f o r e t h e Grand Jury e l a t i n g t o

t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n

On August 26,

014.

31.

The Grand J u r y

s u i t e

i s l o c a t e d i n t h e

same

b u i l d i n g and

on

h e

same l o o r a s

t h e

Norristown

o f f i c e s

of OAG, n c l u d i n g a g e n t s , a t t o r n e y s , a nd

s u p p o r t s t a f f

employed w i t h i n t h e

Bureau of N a r c o t i c s I n v e s t i g a t i o n s , the

Organized

Crime S e c t i o n , t h e Criminal P r o s e c u t i o n s

S e c t i o n ,

and

o t h e r

u n i t s

ofOAG.

32. OAG

as been informed

t h a t

on

t h e

day

of

h e i r

testimony A t t o r n e y s

Fina

a n d

Costanzo

encountered

S p e c i a l

Agent Michael A . i l e t t o o n h e i r

wa y

o

t h e

Grand J u r y room.

33.

A g ent

M i l e t t o was

t h e lead

i n v e s t i g a t o r

i n t h e

i n v e s t i g a t i o n t h a t

i s

t h e

s u b j e c t of

the

S p e c i a l

P r o s e c u t o r ' s

i n q u i r y

and he

p r e v i o u s l y

t e s t i f i e d b e f o r e t h e Grand

J u r y .

34.

The p r e c i s e

n a t u r e

of the e n c o u n t e r between

A g ent

M i l e t t o a nd

A t t o r n e y s

Fina

and

Costanzo

i s u n c l e a r ,

but t

appears t o

have g i v e n r i s e

t o


Order because

t h e

P r o t e c t i v e

Order

was s s u e d

t h e

next day; g a i n , OAG

a n

o n l y

surmise

because

t h e


Judge

has

e f u s e d t o r e v e a l

t h e n a t u r e

of h e i n c i d e n t o r who

a s

n v o l v e d .

35.

A g ent

M i l e t t o

d e n i e s t h a t

h e em aged i n

a n y

a c t

of o b s t r u c t i o n ,

i n t i m i d a t i o n ,

o r

r e t a l i a t i o n o n

August

26,

2014,

r t h a t

a n y

a c t

of i s

could r e a s o n a b l y be

c o n s t r u e d

a s such; o

the c o n t r a r y ,

a c c o r d i n g

t o A g ent M i l e t t o , h e

and a t l e a s t

one o t h e r

agent

b e l i e v e d

t h a t A t t o r n e y

Fina

was

r y i n g t o i n t i m i d a t e

A g ent

M i l e t t o .

36.

Agent M i l e t t o

i n d i c a t e s t h a t h e h a s

m u l t i p l e

w i t n e s s e s t o

h i s a c t i o n s a nd

t h e

a c t i o n s

of t t o r n e y Fina on

August 26,

014.

7


9/61

37.

The

s s u a n c e

of

h e P r o t e c t i v e

Order

w i t h n o

p r i o r n o t i c e t o Agent M i l e t t o ,

OAG,

o r

the approximately

800

p e r s o n s

s u b j e c t

t o t h e P r o t e c t i v e

Order

was

a n abuse

of

i s c r e t i o n .

38. The S p e c i a l

P r o s e c u t o r

has

i n d i c a t e d

t h a t

a n o t h e r

OACT

agent

e n t e r e d

a

room

occupied b y

t h e

S p e c i a l P r o s e c u t o r , Attorney F i n a ,

and

A t t o r n e y Costanzo, t a r e d

i n

a

h o s t i l e

manner a t

A t t o r n e y Fina and

Attorney Costanza

and

demanded t o

speak

t o t h e S p e c i a l

P r o s e c u t o r .

39.

According t o

t h e S p e c i a l

P r o s e c u t o r , t h e a g e n t t o l d him, n s t r o n g language, h a t

t h e proceeding

was

i d i c u l o u s and

t h a t

Attomevs Fina and Costanzo could not be

r u s t e d .

40.

As

m a t t e r

of

fundamental

p r o c e d u r a l

due

p r o c e s s ,

a n

i n d i v i d u a l

r n a y

not

be

deprived

of

a

c o n s t i t u t i o n a l l y

p r o t e c t e d i n t e r e s t w i t h o u t

a

h e a r i n g , a n d a h e a r i n g r e q u i r e s n o t i c e

a nd a n o p p o r t u n i t y t o be

h e a r d ;

i t

follows

t h a t t h e opportunity

t o

be

h e a r d

must be a t a

meaningful

time and i n a meaningful

r n a n n e r .

See Mathews

v .

E l d r i d g e , 4 2 4 U.S. 319, 333

(1)76); Commonwealth

v . M a ldon ado,

38

A.2d

710,

714 Pa . 2003).

41.

OAG n d i t s employees,

n c l u d i n g

t h e

a g e n t s d e s c r i b e d above,

have

never

been

heard i n

a n y

w a y , much l e s s i n a

r n e a n i n g f u l

time and manner,

w i t h r e s p e c t

t o i s s u a n c e

of h e

P r o t e c t i v e

Order.

42. 'Mere s n o

e a s o n a b l e b a s i s f o r

concluding t h a t every employee ofOAG s l i k e l y

t o engage i n i n t i m i d a t i n g

a c t i v i t y

o r r e t a l i a t o r y conduct based on testimony

b e f o r e t h e Grand

J u r y ,

e s p e c i a l l y

since

a )

h e

v a s t

m a j o r i t y of

OA Ci

employ ees ha ve n o

c o n t a c t with t h e C i r a n d

J u r y and would

be

completely unaware of

h e S p e c i a l P r o s e c u t o r ' s

i n v e s t i g a t i o n , b )

ven among

those

employees

who

have

c o n t a c t

with t h e

Grand

J u r y ,

most would

be

completely unaware of

the S p e c i a l P r o s e c u t o r ' s

i n v e s t i g a t i o n (as

j u s t one

example, t i s

d i f f i c u l t t o

imagine t h a t

a

Medicaid F r a u d _ i n v e s t i g a t o r

i n P i t t s b u r g h would

have

any k nowledge o f , o r

i n t e r e s t

i n ,

a leak

8


10/61


i n v o l v i n g t h e

Norristown

Grand

j u r y ) ,

and

(c) h e r e

have been

n o r e p o r t s

of

a n y

c o n t a c t

with w i t n e s s e s a p a r t from h e i n c i d e n t s i n v o l v i n g t h e a g e n t s .

43.

Contact

between

t h e

w i t n e s s e s

and

t h e

a g e n t s

cannot r e a s o n a b l y

c o n s t i t u t e

i n t i m i d a t i o n given

t h a t OAG g e n t s work on t h e

p r e m i s e s and e s p e c i a l l y

s i n c e both

A t t o r n e y

F i n a

and

A t t o r n e y

Costanzo a r e c a r e e r p r o s e c u t o r s who

have

worked w i t h , d i r e c t e d a n d

s u p e r v i s e d

a g e n t s on

m a n y o c c a s i o n s .

44. The P r o t e c t i v e

Order c o n s t i t u t e s

a n abuse of

i s c r e t i o n

because

OAG a s never

given

n o t i c e

and

n o

h e a r i n g , as e q u i r e d t o

s a t i s f y

b a s i c due

p r o c e s s ,

was

conducted.

45.

The

P r o t e c t i v e

Order

c o n s t i t u t e s

a n

abuse

of

d i s c r e t i o n

because

t h e i n d i v i d u a l

employees s u b j e c t t o t h e P r o t e c t i v e

Order

were

never

given n o t i c e a nd no h e a r i n g , a s r e q u i r e d t o

s a t i s f y

b a s i c due p r o c e s s ,

was

conducted.

46.

Assuming h a t

t h e

i n c i d e n t s i n v o l v i n g A t t o r n e y Fina and

t h e

Agents

a r e t h e

b a s i s

f o r t h e i s s u a n c e

of h e

P r o t e c t i v e

Order,

h e



a n abuse

of

i s c r e t i o n

because t h e

conduct of h e a g e n t s

cannot r e a s o n a b l y be

c o n s t r u e d

a s

a n

a c t

of

n t i m i d a t i o n ,

o b s t r u c t i o n ,

or e t a l i a t i o n .

47.

Assuming t h a t

t h e

i n c i d e n t s

i n v o l v i n g

A t t o r n e y F i n a

and

t h e

a g e n t s a r e the

b a s i s

f o r t h e

i s s u a n c e

of h e P r o t e c t i v e

Order,


Order c o n s t i t u t e s a n abuse

of

i s c r e f i o n

because

t h e

conduct

of h e a g e n t s

cannot e a s o n a b l y

be

a t t r i b u t e d t o

every

employee ofOAG.

48.

Assuming t h a t

t h e i n c i d e n t s i n v o l v i n g

A t t o r n e y Fina a nd

t h e a g e n t s

a r e

the b a s i s

f o r the

i s s u a n c e

of h e P r o t e c t i v e

Order,


Order c o n s t i t u t e s an abuse

of

i s c r e t i o n

because t h e r e i s n o

evidence t h a t t h e a g e n t s s u p e r v i s o r s

were

aware

t h a t

t h e y would

engage

i n

i n t i m i d a t i o n , o b s t r u c t i o n , o r r e t a l i a t i o n , o r

t h a t

t h e y had

engaged

n such con duct n t h e p a s t , a n d

so

t h e

conduct of

h e a g e n t s

cannot

e a s o n a b l y

be

a t t r i b u t e d

t o OAG s a whole.

9


11/61

49. The

P r o t e c t i v e

Order c o n s t i t u t e s a n abuse of

i s c r e t i o n

because

t h e

scope

of

h e

P r o t e c t i v e Order, n

terms

of b o t h t h e

persons

s u b j e c t

t o t h e

Order

and t h e

conduct

covered b y

t h e

Order,

s

f a r b r o a d e r t h a n n e c e s s a r y t o

p r o t e c t

a n y

w i t n e s s b e f o r e

t h e Grand

J u r y .

50.

The

P r o t e c t i v e

Order


a n abase of

d i s c r e t i o n

because

persons

who

v i o l a t e

the

Order a r e s u b j e c t e d t o

t h e

j u r i s d i e t i o n of

h e

Court

f o r purposes of

a

p r o s e c u t i o n

under

8 a.C.S.

§ 4955,

which p e r m i t s ,

i n t e r

a l i a ,

p r o s e c u t i o n f o r

o t h e r ,

s u b s t a n t i v e

o f f e n s e s

and t h r contempt

of

o u r t ,

and

allows f o r a

w a r r a n t l e s s a r r e s t , 18

Pa.C.S. § 9 5 5 ( a ) ( 1 ) ,

( a ) ( 2 ) ,

( b ) ,

and

t h e r e

i s n o u b s t a n t i a l

evidence s u p p o r t i n g the e x e r c i s e of

such u r i s d i c t i o n .

AI.

EXERCISE

OF

UR1S1ICTION

51. OAG

e q u e s t s

t h a t t h e

Court

invoke

i t s


under 4 2 Pa.C.S. 726,

which

allows h e Court o

assume p l e n a r y j u r i s d i c t i o n i n

a n y

m a t t e r pending b e f o r e

a n y

c o u r t i n v o l v i n g

a n

i s s u e of

immediate

p u b l i c

importance and e n t e r a

f i n a l

o r d e r

o r

o t h e r w i s e

cause

r i g h t a n d

j u s t i c e

t o be

done.

52.

The

P r o t e c t i v e Order i s a

m a t t e r of p u b l i c

importance

because a governmental

agency

w i t h l aw

e n f o r c e r n e n t

d u t i e s

and o t h e r

r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s important t o

t h e

p u b l i c

i s

s u b j e c t

t o the

terms

of


Order an d

l i m i t e d

i n i t s

a b i l i t y t o

c a r r y

out

t s

f u n c t i o n s .

53.

The

P r o t e c t i v e

Order

i s a

m a t t e r

of p u b l i c

importance because

OAG i s

handicapped

thereby i n

i t s r o l e a s

a law

enforcement ag ency

o r

o t h e r w i s e

because a l l

w i t n e s s e s

a r e , a c c o r d i n g t o

t h e

P r o t e c t i v e Order,

s h i e l d e d

from

OAG

a n y a c t undertaken

b y

OAG

i n v o l v i n g

a n y

w i t n e s s

i n t h e S p e c i a l



may

e

c o n s t r u e d

a s

an

a c t

of

i n t i r n i d a t i o n ,

o b s t r u c t i o n ,

o r

r e t a l i a t i o n ,

such a s :

( a )

reviewing

i n v e s t i

R a t i o n s

i n v o l v i n g

Attorney

F i n a , Attomey

Costanzo, o r t h e

former

Deputy

A t t o r n e y

General t o whom

h e

u n d e r l y i n g


was

a s s i g n e d ;

( 1 1 ) p e r s o n n e l m a t t e r s

i n v o l v i n g a n y

of

t h o s e

p e r s o n s

o r

o t h e r ,

10


12/61

unknown

w i t n e s s e s ; ( c )

p e r s o n n e l

a c t i o n s

i n v o l v i n g

any

of

the

v a r i o u s

OAG

mployees

wh o

have t e s t i f i e d b e f o r e t h e

Grand

J u r y i n

t h e

S p e c i a l Pmsecutor's i n v e s t i g a t i o n ; o r (d) r i m i n a l o r

c i v i l i n v e s t i g a t i o n s i n t o any

p e r s o n s ,

knovvn o r

unlmovvn, under


Order

r e l a t i n g t o

I f

1 ,

3, , n c l u d i n g f o r

a c t i o n s

u n r e l a t e d

t o

the

S p e c i a l

P r o s e c u t o r ' s i n v e s t i g a t i o n .

54. Because

t h e

P r o t e c t i v e Order was

f f e c t i v e

immediately,

h e p u b l i c

importance of

the i s s u e s

p r e s e n t e d h e r e i n a l s o i s immediate.

5 .

Appeal i n

t h e

o r d i n a r y manner

i s

not f e a s i b l e

because

most of

t h e p e r s o n s

a f f e c t e d b y

h e

P r o t e c t i v e

Order

r e not

even

v v a r e of

t s

e x i s t e n c e .

56.

Appeal

i n

t h e o r d i n a r y

manner

i s

not

e a s i b l e

i n

t h a t t h e P r o t e c t i v e

Order

a f f e c t s

hundreds

of

n d i v i d u a l s .

1 1


13/61

VII.CONCLUSION

WHEREFORE, h e Pennsylvania

O f f i c e

of Attorney General,

through

the

Attorney

General

and

undersigned

counsel,

e s p e c t f u l l y r e q u e s t s t h a t

t h i s

Honorable Court n t e r an Order

granting t h i s Application f o r

S p e c i a l

Relief

and

e i t h e r

v a c a t i n g Paragraphs 2

nd 5 of

the

P r o t e c t i v e

Order or remanding the case

t o

t h e Supervising

Judge

o r

a e a r i n g

c o n s i s t e n t

with 18

Pa.C.S.§

954,

r such o t h e r

r e l i e f

as

the

Court

may

e e m

p p r o p r i a t e .

Respectfully submitted,

OFFICE

OFATTORNEY GENERAL

Criminal Law

i v i s i o n

Appeals

and

Legal

Services Section

16 `

h Floor-Strawberry Square

Harrisburg,PA

7120

(717)

05-0098

(Fax)

717) 83-5431

Date: S e p t e m b e r

19,

014

KATHLEEN

G.

KANE

Attorney General

LAWRENCEM.

HERBA

Executive D e pu t y

Attorney General

Director,

Criminal

Law ivision

i

f)

By:

1

r

M

S

.BARKER -

Chief

Deputy

Attorney

General

Attorney

No. 7315

jbarkerAattorney

eneral.gov

12


14/61

VERIFICATION

• Th e a c t s r e c i t e d i n t h e f o r e g o i n g Commonwealth's Answer t o

P e t i t i o n

f o r R e v i e w

a r e

t r u e a r i d

c o r r e c t

t o

t h e

b e s t

of

my now l e h e

and

b e l i e f . This s t a t e m e n t i s

made

v v i t h l c n o w l e c l g e

t h a t a a l s e

s t a t e m e n t i s p u n i s h a b l e

b y

law

under

18

Pa. C.S.§

904(h).

/ . %

B y:

OFFICE

OF

ATTORNEY GENERAL

Criminal

Law

i v i s i o n

Appeals

egal

e r v i c e s S e c t i o n

16

t h

Floor—Strawberry Square

Harrisburg,PA

7120

(717)

05-0098

Date: S e p t e m b e r 19,

014

IES .

Chi ef Deputy

Attorney

General

Attorney No. 7315

13


15/61

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK


16/61

S t a t e

A.G. probed

Ph il l y

NAACP

e a d e r M o n c l e s i r e ' s f i n a n c e s 5 e a r s

ago

P a g e

of6

Friday, September 9,

2014

2

ohn Bo

lans' F o r e c a s t

s

P h i l a d e l p h i a ,

PA

p h i t t y

corn

Member

ogin:

Sign

R e g i s t e r ; f

&

1

S e a r c h

S t j b l

l

News Sports I

En t e r t a in m en t

Business

l

p in ion ood ifestyle

H e a l t h

l

ore

BREAKING HENS

VIDEO VOICES/SLOGS PHILADELPHIA

NEW ERSEY

POLITICS EDUCATION

OPINION

ontromoEs

NATIONAVORLD WEATHER

TRAFFIC

LOTTERY

S t a t e

A.G.

robed

hilly NAACP

l e a d e r

Mond e s i r e ' s

f inanc es 5 ears

ago

J . V V i r y a a

t I o n d e s t r a . .

fanner P f a . s i ' d o o t of f K . P hPo dei3

OhTa

Chapter of

he

NA R L . P

on

kupast 10. D o 9.

Da

. q d M a i a f e f f i

S t a f f

Ftwfug.raphe4

CHRISBRENNAN, a ily

News taff

Wri ter

brarrnac@,phiflynews.corn,

215454-5973:c

LAST FDA

ED Thursda

. June

,

2014,

, 4 5

PM

STATEATTORNEY

eneral

Kathleen

K an e

s

reviewing a 2009 r a n d - j u r y


ofi.WhyattMondesìre,

ormer he ad of he

NAACP n P h i l a d e l p h i a ,

and

one

of i s ernployees, acc ording

t o

documents obtained by the

Daffy

IVews.

Mondesire's

employee,

a r r i e t G a r r e t t ,

and

her

daughter

pleaded g u i l t y i n 2010

o

s t e a l i n g

n e a r l y

$220,000 n

s t a t e

grant mone y o r a

o b - t r a i n i n g

program. a r r e t t was

sentenced t o a m inimum

of

i x

months n

j a i l

and

ordered

t o

pay e s t i t u t i o n . Her daughter got

18

months

p r o b a t i o n .

A

009

memo r i t t e n

by

then-Deputy

A t t o r n e y

General

W i l l i a m Davis

r .

says

n v e s t i g a t o r s

"uncovered what

appeared t o b e questionable spending" f t a t e mone y by

Mondesire.

A

ertise

Her e

E n t e s t

MINOS Vid40

Most e l

e t iNews

tories:

H i g h

school coach

resigns n

alleged

g ay

-attack

case

1 Schuylkill Banks

' boardwalk

opens

,

oo n

Pair i g h t

to save NE

P h i l l y

home

f t e r

son's arrest

Odd

.J.

ivorce case

has NFL inks

Schools

n

P C P C 0 1 1 o s

closed for 3rd day

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/20140606 S t a t e

A

G probed

P h i l l y

. . .

9/19/2014


17/61

S t a t e

A.G.

probed

Ph il l y

NAACP e a d e r

M o n c l e s i r e ' s f i n a n c e s

5

y e a r s ago P a g e 2 f

6

Travel eals

$140 p

-

Downtown

D . C .

otel

S a l e

Ulm

a l l ,

20% ff

See

ll

travel

d e a l s

e

AWED

r r

t v t g o o

l e n s ; f i

Weekly

irculars

RADtOSHACIC

Hot Weekly eals1

2 AYS EF T

TAR.ET

USA:

Get The e s t OF

Everything

EXPIRES TOMORROW

Kane, a

Democrat, s

now

r y i n g

t o d e t e r r n i n e

what happened

w i t h the Mondesire i n v e s t i g a t i o n .

Gov.

o r b e t t ,

a Republican,

was

he

a t t o r n e y general

t

the time.

MORECOVERAGE

P o k i r e

probe

shooting

at

upper

Montco

cornpleA

C h r i s t i e chief f taff

subpoenaed

Mandesire,

4 , ays h e

was

ever questioned

and

denies

any

f i n a n c i a l wrongdoing.

Th e

2009

Davis merno

e t a i l e d

f o r

h i s bosses

what had

b e e n

uncovered

about

Mondesire and G a r r e t t , who

orked

at he

P h i l a d e l p h i a

Sunday Sun,

weekly

newspaper Mondesire

p u b l i s h e s .

A

o n p r o f i t c a l l e d Next Generation Community Development

Corp., which

s operated by Mondesire, e l d a

t a t e -

government

grant

o r

a o b s - t r a i n i n g

program

n 2004 and

2005,

but

handed

t

o f f

t o

G a r r e t t ,

who a n another n o n p r o f i t

c a l l e d C r e a t i v e

Urban

Education

Systerns,

or

CUES,

according

t o

the Davis

memo.

Mondesire was i s t e d

as

chairman of the

CUES

oard, he

memo

oted,

h i l e

G a r r e t t served as

h e t r e a s u r e r f o r Next

G e n e r a t i o n ' s board.

Davis

wrote

h i s merno

o

then-Chief Deputy A t t o r n e y General

Frank

Fina

and

then-Senior

Deputy

Attorney General E. Marc

Costanzo.

C o r b e t t , as t t o r n e y

general, nam e d

Fina n 2006 o h e ad a

n ew

p u b l i c - c o r r u p t i o n u n i t and Costanza

o

work

on

cas es o r

the u n i t

i n

the

h i l a d e l p h i a r e g i o n .

Fina

and Costanza now ork n

a

i m i l a r u n i t

f o r

D i s t r i c t

A t t o r n e y

S e t h V V i l l i a m s .

I n

the memo, avis

wrote:

*

Next

Generation's

bank-account

e c o r d s ,

obtained

w i t h a

g r a n d - j u r y subpoena,

h ow e d deposits

of 1.3 i l l i o n i n

governrnent grants n a

one-year

p e r i o d

Another $521,000 n the account came

rom

poli t i ca l

campaigns,

e n t payments and the i n t e r m i n g l i n g

of

rnoney

from the

Sunday

Sun, which

s

owned

a r i d

operated by

Mondesire,

he

memo a i d

Next Generation

p a i d

$2,273

o

the

P h i l a d e l p h i a Club, a

p r i v a t e and e x c l u s i v e c l u b i n

Center C i t y .

*

Next Generation

spent

tens

o f

thousands,"

r i t i n g

c hecks o

pay

Mondesire's

American

Express i l l

f o r

" c l o t h e s , food,

l o d g i n g gas and

entertainment and a o a n

from

Mellon

Bank.

There

were

l s o

c hecks r i t t e n

t o Mondesire

and

t o

" c a s h . ' '

* Next Generat ion wrote

checks

o r

$169,960

o

Charles

and

Claudia Tasco

and h e i r

company,

C&C

o n s t r u c t i o n .

(Charles Tasco

s the son of i t y Councilwoman Marian

Also OP

hilly.com

HEALTH:

ENTERTAINMENT:

F000:

JOBS:

Unemployment i s e s

i n

Del.

alley

Does h i l l y h a v e a

doctor shortage?

Giroux

injured at

Flyers camp

'fina F ey a l k s

'This Is

Where Leave You'

Volvér

drops

p r i c e s ,

eliminates i c k e t sales

signs

t ' s t i m e to

oak

ar

a

new

ob

StagConnected

Oet

h e

a t e s t

Philfy.cao Daiiy

H ea& r e e s news/atter

delivered a Our rneR. Si9n

i p

n o w

En ter

mail ddress

o

sign up

Alceady

a

h i l l y . s o r n r n e r n e e r ?

( : . . f 0

Yes

(6

50

h t t p : / / w w w . p h i 1

l y . c o m / p h i 1

1y/news/20140606 S t a t e A_G

probed

P h i l l y . . .

9/19/2014


18/61

S t a t e

A.G. robed

Ph i

l l y NAACP

e a d e r

Mondesire's

i n a n c e s 5 e a r s ago

P a g e 3 f6

See e r e Circulars

Tasco, a

r i e n d

and p o l i t i c a l a i l y o f Mondesire's

o r

more than

t h r e e decades.)

$6,431 i n

CUES one y

was iven t o Mondesire o r

what

G a r r e t t

c a l l e d

c o n s u l t i n g .

That ype of xpense was o t

a l l o w e d ,

according t o

t h e r u l e s

of he

g r a n t .

* n

" v a r i o u s correspondence bet ween G a r r e t t and Mondesire

discovered

by

n v e s t i g a t o r s ,

s h e

questioned

payments

f

more than $70,000 h e

made o

Claudia Tasco.

*

CUES

a i d

$1,099

o r h e a l t h insurance o r Mondesire.

* Davis wanted t o question Mondesire and

p o s s i b l y

subpoena him

o r sworn g r a n d - j u r y testimony

about

a r r e t t ,

CUES

nd Next Generation.

Never questioned

Mondesire,

a former

n q u i r e r r e p o r t e r who erved

as

he top

aide

o

the

a t e U.S. R e p . i l l Gray, a i d

no

one

from

t h e

A . G . ' s O f f i c e

ever

questioned him.

'We

i d n ' t use

any mone y

o r

personal

g a i n , "

Mondesire

a i d .

He a i d t h a t h e h as

not

s e en

the A.G. f f i c e ' s

documents

an d

t w i c e d e c l i n e d an o f f e r

from

the D a i l y News

o

review t h e m .

Mondesire

a i d C&C o n s t n i c t i o n

worked

on

o u r

p r o p e r t i e s ,

i n c l u d i n g the NAACP eadquarters

and

h i s newspaper f f i c e ,

where the Next

Generation n o n - p r o f i t

i s

a l s o

l o c a t e d

Me ought u p p l i e s w i t h my

merican

Express card o r

c o n s t r u c t i o n , " h e a i d

"They never asked me

i n g l e

q u e s t i o n

back

n 2009.We

rehabbed

the

b u i l d i n g s . We pent mon ey

buying s t u f f o r the

b u i l d i n g s ,

c o n s t r u c t i o n

and paying o f f

developers."

G a r r e t t d e c l i n e d t o comment bout

he

i n v e s t i g a t i o n s He r

daughter i d not respond

t o

requests

o r

comment.

T h e May

010

n ew s release

about

a r r e t t ' s a r r e s t f e a t u r e d

Corbett

a y i n g

out th e charges.

Corbett i d

not respond

t h i s week o

two

q u e s t i o n s : Was e

b r i e f e d on the

Mondesire


and

d i d h e

p l a y

a r o l e

i n

d e c i d i n g

what happ ened

w i t h

t h a t

probe?

Mandesire

was uspended

by the

NAACP ' s

n a t i o n a l

headquarters n A p r i l a f t e r h e

feuded

p u b l i c l y

w i t h board

m e m b e r s about

h e

finances

of

he

l o c a l

chapter and Next

Generation.

Those board

m e m b e r s -

id Booker, Donald "Ducky

B i r t s

and the Rev. l i s h a

M o r r i s

-

l s o

were suspended.

Booker

and M o r r i s , who ay they are t i l l Next Generation

board

m e m b e rs , re now

sking

a

Common leas udge

t o

h t

tp://www.philly.com/phi1ly/news/20140606_S tate

A

G

probed

P h i l l y _ . . .

9/19/2014


19/61

S t a t e A.G . robed Ph il l y NAACP e a d e r

Mondesire's i n a n c e s 5 e a r s ago P a g e

4

f6

force

Mondesire

t o

s h ow t h e m the n o n p r o f i t ' s f i n a n c i a l

r e c o r d s .

As

judge considers

h a t r e q u e s t ,

Kane's t a f f i s r e v i e w i n g

what

b e c a m e

f

the

2009 Mondesire probe.

David P e i f e r ,

who

eads the A . G . ' s Bureau af

Special

I n v e s t i g a t i o n s , on March

21

i n t e r v i e w e d Michael

M i l e t t o , t he

s p e c i a l

agent

who

n v e s t i g a t e d

G a r r e t t

and

Mondesire.

T h e

a i l y

News btained a t r a n s c r i p t of

h a t taped

i n t e r v i e w .

M i [ e t t o t o l d

P e i f e r t h a t h e subpoenaed Next Generation's

bank account, he t r a n s c r i p t shows.

When d i d

t h a t , found

t h a t

there was whole bunch of

mone y

h a t

appeared

t o

me

o

b e donations

o

the NAACP,

not

fMondesire], and they were going

i n t o Next

Generation's

account and

they

were

b e i n g

used

o r f M o n d e s i r e ' s i

l i f e s t y l e -

m u c h of t ,

M i l e t t o

t o l d P e i f e r .

M i l e t t o

s a i d

h e

was

aken o f f the case

a f t e r Fina

an d

Costanza were

o l d

about he

probe, according

t o

the

t r a n s c r i p t .

M i l e t t a s a i d

" c r i m i n a l

a c t i v i t y

was u s t ignored" f t e r

t h a t . He

added t h a t

two

accountants who ad

worked

f o r Mondesire

had

provided taped statements, i t h one asking

o r

immunity

and

the o t h e r asking

o r

p r o t e c t i o n .

Fina

and Costanza

e c l i n e d t o

c o m m e n t

about

he Mondesire

i n v e s t i g a t i o n , c i t i n g t h e s e cre cy

o f

g r a n d - j u r y proceedings

Davis,

now n p r i v a t e

p r a c t i c e , a l s o d e c l i n e d t o com m e n t ,

c i t i n g the

same

e s t r i c t i o n .

M i l e t t o ,

who

t i l l

works

o r

the

A . G . ' s

o f f i c e ,

a l s o d e c I i n e d

to

comment.

P e i f e r

r e f e r r e d questions

o Kane's

communications

t a f f .

J . J .

Abbott, a

spokesman o r

Kane, e c l i n e d

t o

comm ent.

The ane-Fina

feud

Fina

and Costanzo have

a complicated and c o n t r o v e r s i a l

r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h

Kane.

K an e

c r i t i c i z e d

C o r b e t t ' s

tenure

as t t o r n e y general w h en sh e

r a n

f o r o f f i c e

i n

2012, p e c i f i c a l l y t a r g e t i n g the P enn

t a t e

child-abuse scandal h a t

sent former

s s i s t a n t

o o t b a l l coach

J e r r y

Sandusky to

p r i s o n

Kane's t a f f i s now conducting an extensive

review of h a t


Fina l e d

the

Sandusky probe.

http://www.philly.comIphilly/news/20140606

S t a t e

A

G

probed

9/19/2014


20/61

S t a t e A.G . probed Ph i l l Y NAACP

e a d e r

Mondesire's

i n a n c e s

5

y e a r s ago

P a g e

5 f

6

Kane ,

on

F e b 5, ssued a ta tem en t

n o t i n g

that

her

f f i c e ' s

Sandusky review had b e en undelway o r one

year, adding

t h a t delays n

t h e undertaking

w i l l

b e

described i n

more

e t a i l

when he r e p o r t

i s made

u b l i c . "

A

onth l a t e r ,

t h e

n q u i r e r reported t h a t Kane eclined t o

pursue an

i n v e s t i g a t i o n previously

l e d b y

Fina and

Costanza

s t a r t i n g i n

2010, h a t used Philadelphia

l o b b y i s t

Tyron A l i as

a

c o n f i d e n t i a l

informant o

tape conversations

w i t h

four

P h i l l y

s t a t e

representatives and a

former

r a f f i c

Court

udge.On he

tapes, h e

representatives and judg e a c c ep t ca s h

or i f t s

from

Al i

Kane as said Fina dropped

2,033

r i m i n a l counts

against l i ,

who ad b e e n charged w i t h s t e a l i n g $430,000 from a t a t e

program,

24

ays

before

s h e

was

worn i n t o

o f f i c e .

She aid

t h a t

" e x t r a o r d i n a r i l y lenient deal

c r i p p l e d

the

c h a n c e of h i s c a s e succeeding

i n

prosecution."

Fine, n a

e t t e r

published b y the

n q u i r e r a

week

f t e r

the

i r s t

s t o r y ran, a l l e d on Kane o explain her decision.

The n q u i r e r

also

published

a

l e t t e r

that day from F i n a ' s

boss,

Williams, r i t i c a l

of K a n e .

K a n e

eventually

turned

over he A l i c a s e i l e t o Williams,

who

i s now

xamining

w het h er c har g es can

b e

brought

against

he

four representative s and

the r a f f i c Court udge,

who

s

c u r r e n t l y on r i a l i n an unrelated federal o r r u p t i o n case.

On

w i t t e r :

@ChrisBrennanON

B l o g : p h . l y / P h i l l y C l o u t . c o m

CURESBRENNAN

D a i l y News t q l f W r i t m •

r e 7 m a e f , S p r t i l l y n e w s . c o m ,

21

5-

S54;5973V

s i w r e j w e e t R d i t i

E m a i l

Si)

re this story wit h friends who ould ike t .

We

ecommend

w h i c h

o f

y o u r

friends

would n j o y t h i s

s t o r y .

MORE FROM

T 1 - 1 E

WEB

Cheerleaders

From

Na

e e k 2 ou Have

To

S e e

RantSportsj

5 hings

You

Should

Never

Say

t

Work

; m o n s t e r )

Dwyane

Wade's

Wives, i r l f r i e n d s Ai l

Wrap p ed

Up

n

15

i c t u r e s (RaniSports)

3 hings

You

Should Never

Do When

N e g o t i a t i n g

Your

a l a r y O r i o n s t e r )

i n v e s t i n g 101

W h a t

s a Hed g e

Fund?

(Mandoed

Funds

s s oc i a t i on)

Wal-Mart

spokesman r e s i g n s

over

i e on

resum e F o t i u n e )

Ru r i r i t s

EnniFsiorls

MORE

FROM H I L L Y . C O M

cieSean

Jackson

home u r g l a r y

remains

'open i n v e s t i g a t i o n , ' h i l l y

cop s

say

Missing C h i l d r e n ' s

Garden

d i r e c t o r found

without x p l a n a t i o n

3 u r t i n Kensington warehouse l a z e

L i v i n g

i n

t r u t h

means

being

on guard

D i s r u p t i v e passenger pleads u i l t y

to

i n t e r f e r i n g w i t h

f l i g h t

cr ew

'LOVE ' r t i s t

I n d i a n a doesn't show t

c e l e b r a t i o n

h t t p : / / w r w . p h i 1 1 y . c o m / p h i 1 1 y / n e w s / 2 O

4 6 0 _ _ _ S t a t e _ A _ _ G

probed_Philly

. . . 9/19/20 4


21/61

S t a t e

A.G .

probed P hi

l l y

NAACP

e a d e r

Mondesire's i n a n c e s

5

y e a r s ago

P a g e 6 f6

p h M y c o

News

Sports Entertainment Business

Food

Lifestyle Health

C i as s i f i e ds :

Jobs

Cars] eal

Estate

Rentals

Marketplace Celebrations

Print

Offers

Online Weekly

i r c u l ars

S i t e

N e i - V i c e s :

Advertise

on Philiy.com

Rates a d Specs

Mobile

i t e Apps

lap

The

nquirer Di g i tal

E d i t i on

Subscriber

Services

Subscribe

Newspapers

n Education

Daily

News

i g i tal Edition

Subscriber

Services

Subscribe

About

h i l l v . c . c r n Contact

Us

Terrns

of

Use

r i v a . . y § . 1 a t e r n e r A . :

9 p a r l y t t

2

p

1

4

Copyright

o 1 4

I n t e r s t a t e

Genera] edia. LLC

Pariners:

Philly DealYo

Parade Magazine

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/20140606 S t a t e

A G

probed_philly . . . 9/19/2014


22/61



23/61

INTHE

COURT OFCOMMON LEAS

MONTGOMERYCOUNTY, ENNSYLVANIA

IN RE:

THE

THIRTY-FIVESTATEWIDE

INVESTIGATINGGRAND URY

:

SUPREME

COURTOFPENNSYLVANIA

:

NO.

76

M.D. MISC.

DKT.

012

: MONTGOMERY

COUNTY

COMMON

PLEAS

: M.D. 1424-2014

: NOTICENO, 23

SEALINGORDER

AND NOW

h i s

2 7 t h

day

of

August,

2014,

t i s

hereby ORDERED, h a t t h e

a t t a c h e d

Order

of

August

27,

2014

be

f i l e d

under

s e a l

with

t h e

C l e r k

of

Courts

of

Montgomery County

n i i l f u r t h e r

Order

of h i s C o u r t .

BY

THE

COURT:

, )

WILLIAM

R.

CARPEN

Supervising Judge

ER,

J.


24/61

IN

THE

COURTOFCOMMON

PLEAS

MONTGOMERY

COUNTY,

ENNSYLVANIA

INRE:

: SUPREME

COURT

OF

PENNSYLVANLk

:

NO.

76

M.D.

MISC DKT.

012

THETHIRTY-FIVE

STATEWIDE

:

MONTGOMERYCOUNTY

COMMON

LEAS

INVESTIGATINGGRAND

JURY

: M.D.

424-2014

:

NOTICENO. 23

ORDER

AND

NOW,

h i s

2 7 t h

day

of

ugust, 014,

t

i s

hereby ORDERED,

u r s u a n t

t o

18

a.C.S.§ 4954

r e l a t i n g

t o

p r o t e c t i v e o r d e r s ) ,

t h a t :

1 . The f f i c e of

h e

A t t o r n e y General,

x c e p t

upon

p e c i f i c

a u t h o r i z a t i o n b y

t h i s

Court

or h e

S p e c i a l

P r o s e c u t o r ,

s h a l l

r e f r a i n

from

any

involvement

n ,

or c c e s s

t o ,

t h e

i n v e s t i g a t i v e e f f o r t s of h e S p e c i a l

P r o s e c u t o r .

2.

Employees of

h e

O f f i c e

of h e A t t o r n e y

General

h a l l

r e f r a i n

from

engaging

n , o r

s o l i c i t i n g , any

a c t of

b s t r u c t i o n ,

i n t i m i d a t i o n o r

r e t a l i a t i o n

a g a i n s t any w i t n e s s summoned

by h e Grand

J u r y

i n t h e

S p e c i a l



3. All

r a n s c r i p t s of rand u r y

t e s t i m o n y

s h a l l

be

given o n l y from

h e

s t e n o g r a p h e r

or h e i r

employer

i r e c t l y

t o

t h e S u p e r v i s i n g

Judge

and

h e

S p e c i a l

P r o s e c u t o r , no

copy

h a l l b e

i v e n t o t h e

A t t o r n e y

G e n e r a l ' s

O f f i c e .


25/61

4.

Employees of

h e

O f f i c e of h e A t t o r n e y General h a l l n o t have c c e s s t o

t r a n s c r i p t s

of r o c e e d i n g s

b e f o r e t h e Grand

u r y o r S u p e r v i s i n g

Judge,

e x h i b i t s ,

o r o t h e r i n f o r m a t i o n

p e rt a i n i n g t o

t h e S p e c i a l P r os e c u t o r ' s

i n v e s t i g a t i o n . A l l i n f o r m a t i o n r e l a t e d

t o t h e

work of

h e

S p e c i a l

P r o s e c u t o r s h a l l

be kept

n t h e

c u s t o d y of

h e S p e c i a l P r o s e c u t o r and


J u d g e .

5 . Any

e r s o n , i n c l u d i n g

employees

of h e O f f i c e of

h e

A t t o r n e y

G e n e r a l ,

who

ngage

n

any

a c t

of

b s t r u c t i o n , i n t i m i d a t i o n

o r

r e t a l i a t i o n

a g a i n s t

a

w i t n e s s

summoned b y

h e Grand u r y

i n

t h e S p e c i a l P r o s e c u t o r ' s


may

be

p r o s e c u t e d a s

s e t

f o r t h i n 18

a . C . S . §

4955 r e l a t i n g

t o

v i o l a t i o n

of r d e r s )

and

any t h e r a p p l i c a b l e p r ov i s i o n s of

h e Crimes

Code of e n n s y l v a n i a .

6. The

p e c i a l

P r o s e c u t o r s h a l l

s e r v e a

copy of

h i s

Order upon

h e

O f f i c e

of

t h e A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l .

7. The

o n t e n t s of

h i s Order

r e

s e a l e d ,

and h a l l

not b e

i s c l o s e d ( e i t h e r

v e r b a l l y or n w r i t i n g ) b y

h e

O f f i c e of h e Attorney

General

o any

i n d i v i d u a l o u t s i d e of h e

O f f i c e

of h e

A t t o r n e y General

under e n a l t y of

contempt of o u r t .


26/61

BYTHECOURT:

jaLE

otli-Vir

WILLIAM

R.

CARPENTE

J .

Supervising

Judge

Copies

sent

on

A u g u s t

27, 014

By

i r s t Class Mai l o :

Kathleen G .

an e ,

ennsylvania

t t o r n e y General

Thomas

.

a r l u e c i o ,

Esquire


27/61



28/61

I N

THE

COURT y :

COMMONMEM

MONTGOMERY

cQUNTY:

PENN$YLVANIA

I N R E :

THE

H I R T Y - F I F T H

S T A T E W I D E

SUPREME

COURT

OF

PENNSYLVANIA

.

N.

7 6

M . D .

M I S C .

D K T .

0 1 2

MONTGOMERY

COUNTY

COMMON L E A S

I N V E S A I G A T I N Q f ;

N D

J U R Y

: . D . 6 4 4 - 2 0 1 2

: O T I C E N O .

2 3

OIWER

AND NOW,

h i s d a y

o f

S e p t e m b e r ,

2 0 1 4 ,

t

Iglerebÿ

ORDERED h a t

t h e

a t t a c h e d . .

f i k P d

o n

S e p t e r n b e

2 0 1 4 ,

b e

a n d

i s h e r e b y

s : e k d e d

W I L I J A M C A R P E N T E R

SupefOsing

hidge

T h i r t S i - F i f t h S t a t e w i d e

I n v e s t i g a t i n g

G r t i m d

A t r y


29/61

INTHE

COURT OF

COMMON

PLEAS

MONTGOMERY

COUNTY, ENNSYLVANIA

1N

RE:

THE

THIRTY-RVE STATEWIDE

mEsTicAmc

RAND

IVRY

:

SUPREMECOURTOF

ENNSYLVA:

NIA

NO. 76 WO ISc Kr ., 012

MONTGOMERY

COUNTY

Cat

ON

LEAS

I V I D :

1424-2014

:

NOTICE

NO.

23

ORDER

AND NOW,

h i s

1 7 t h day of

Septernher„2014, n t h e

e x e r c i s e

of t s d i s c r e t i o n

a f t e r

an

i n

camera

h e a r i n g

and

a

F i n d i n g

of

u b s t a n t i a l

e v i d e n c e ,

t h i s

Court

s s u e d

a

P r o t e 0 i v e .

Order;

A n d upon

c o n s i d e r a t i o n of

h e Motion

f o r

R e c o n s i d e r a t i o n f i l e d

b y

t h e

• O f f i c e of

Attorney

General r e l a t i n g

t o

t h e

Order

of

Court i s s u e d

August

27, 2 0 1 4 , y

apd Oter

Arg,ument,

IT

IS

ORDERED

h a t

a

u r t h e r

b e a r i n g

r e l a t e d

t o

t h e i s s u O n e 0 of f p t O t e c k i s i v o

p u r s u a n t t o 18 P a . C . S . 1 §

4954

s h a l l

be

conducted on a

d a t e t o

be

a g r e e d

won

by

the

Attorney

General and

h e S p e c i a l P r o s e c u t o r i n t h 0

chamberg of

h e

S u p e r V i s i n g

Judge n

t h e Grand

J u r y

s u i t e .

The

1 A b j e c t

of h e horing i s

anggation

of o h o i m e t i o n , w i l m e s s

i n t i m i d a t i o n , and/Of

e t a l i a t i o n .

OV:HY,CO AT:

WILLIAM

Supervising

Judge

Copies

sent

on

September

17,2014

By

i r s t

Class

l a i '

t o :

Thomas

E. a r l u e c i o ,

E s q u i r e

a r n e s

1 3 a r k e r , E s q u i r e


30/61

INTHE COURT

OF

COMMON

PLEAS

MONTGOMERY

COUNTY,

ENNSYLVANIA

IN RE:

THE

THIRTY-FIFTH

STATEWIDE

INVESTIGATING

GRAND IIJRY

: SUPREMECOURT OFPENNSYLVANIA

: NO. 76 M.D. V I I S C .

DKT.

012

:

MONTCOMERY

COUNTY

COMMONPLE.

:

M.D. 644-2012

OTICE

ORDER

AND NOW, h i s a . y of

e p t e r n b e r , 2014, t i s

hereby

ORDERED h a t

the

t t a c h e d

f i l e d on

g e p t e r n b e t

0 1 4 , . b e and s

hereby

e a l e d .

WILLIAM .

CARPENTER

S u p e r v i s i n g Judge


S t a t e w i d e

InVe s t i g a t i n g

c i r a n d J u r y


31/61

INTHECOURT

OFCOMMON

LEAS

MONTGOMERYCOUNTY, ENNSYLVANIA

IN

RE:

:

SUPREME

COURT

OF

PENNSYLVANIA

:

NO.

76

M.D.

MISCDKT.

012

THETHIRTY-FIVESTATEWME

:

MONTGOMERY

COUNTY

COMMON

PLEAS

INVESTIGATINGGRANDJURY

: M.D.

424-2014

;

NOTICE

NO.

23

ORDER

AND

NOW, h i s

1 7 t h

day

of

e p t e r n b e r ,

2014,

n

t h e e x e r c i s e

of

t s

d i s c r e t i o n

a f t e r

an i n

camera

h e a r i n g

and

a i n d i n g of u b s t a n t i a l

e v i d e n c e , t h i s

Court

s s u e d

a P r o t e c t i v e

Order;

A n d upon c o n s i d e r a t i o n of h e Motion f o r

R e c o n s i d e r a t i o n f i l e d by t h e O f f i c e of

Attorney Gene ral

r e l a t i n g t o

t h e

Order

of

Court

s s u e d August

27,

014,

IT IS

ORDERED h a t t h e Motion s

GRANTED n p a r t

a s

t o Paragraphs

2 nd

5 of

s a i d

Order,

and t h e f o l l o w i n g

p e r s o n s only s h a l l be

s u b j e c t t o

Paragraphs

2 nd 5 of

a i d

Order:

1 . A n y

person

w h o

a s been sworn

o

Grand J u r y

s e c r e c y .

2 . Any

erson w h o

has r

had

a c c e s s

t o

any Grand

J u r y

i n f o r m a t i o n .

3 . Any person

a s s o c i a t e d

w i t h t h e

J .

Whyatt

Mondesirc

p r o c e e d i n g s

and


A d d i t i o n a l l y ,

Paragraph

7 of s a i d

Order

i s modified

t o a l l o w communication

r e a a r c l i n g

t h e

Order

w i t h

c o u n s e l

f o r a e r s o n

s u b j e c t

t o

t h e

Order,

o r

purposes of p p e a l ,

and

o r

any t h e r ,

s i r n i l a r

purpose r e q u i r e d

by

law,


32/61

BY

THE

COUR

WTI JAM, t .

CARPEN t

. S u p e r v i s i n g

J u c i g e

Copies

sent On

Nowmber

7,

0 1 . 4

1 3 y F i r s t

Class Mail

t o :

Thothas

E,

a r l u c c i ° ,

E s q u i r e

lames

134ker,

s q u i r e


33/61

CERTIFICATE

OF

SERVICE

I hereby

c e r t i f y

t h a t

I a r n

t h i s day

s e r v i n g one copy of h e

f o r e g o i n g A p p l i c a t i o n

of

h e

O f f i c e

of Attorney General t h r


p u r s u a n t

t o

4 2

Pa.C.S. §§

502, 726,

Pa .R .A.P.

3309

upon t h e

p e r s o n s

and

i n t h e

manner

n d i c a t e d

below:

V i a U . S . F i r s l - C l a s s M a i l ,

Postage

pre-paid:

The

Honorable

W i l l i a r n R . Carpenter

Court

of

Common

l e a s of

M o n t g o m e r y

County

M o n t g o m e r y County

Courthouse

P.O.

Box 1 1

N o r r i

stown,PA

9404-0311

610 ) 278-5902

S u p e r v i s i n g Judge)

A n n

T h o m b u r g

Weiss, Clerk of Courts

M on t g omer y

County

Clerk

of

Courts

O f f i c e

P.O.

Box

311

Norristown,PA

9 4 0 4 , - 0 3 1 1

610)

278-3346

Clerk

of

Courts)

By :

OFFICE

OFATTORNEY

GENERAL

Criminal

Law

i v i s i o n

A ppeals

ega l

e r v i c e s S e c t i o n

1 6 t

Floor-Strawberry S q u a r e

Harrisburg,

PA

7120

717) 05-0098

Date: S ept embe r

19,2014

T h o m a s

E.

a r l u c c i o ,

Esquire

Plymouth Greene

O f f i c e

Carnpus

1000

G e rm a n t o w n

Pike,

u i t e

D3

Plymouth

Meeting,

PA

19462-2484

48 4)

74-2899

S p e c i a l P r o s e c u t o r )

JAMES . BARKER

Chief D e p ut y

Attorney

Gener al

Attorney

N o . 7 3 1 5

1 4


34/61

Received 09/19/2014

Supreme

Court

Middle

D i s t r i c

F i l e d 09/19/2014

Supreme

Court

Middle

D i s t r i c

137 MM 0 1 4

IN THESUPREMECOURTOFPENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE ISTRICT

IN

RE:

THE HIRTY-FIFTH STATEWIDE :

INVESTIGATINGGRAND JURY : No. ___

MM

014

:

PETITION OF:

: FILED

UNDER

SEAL

OFFICE OFATTORNEY GENERAL :

MOTIONFORLEAVE

TO

ILE APPLICATION FOR PECIAL

RELIEF

UNDERSEAL

TOTHE

HONORABLE HIEF JUSTICE

AND

USTICES OF

THE

SUPREMECOURTOF

PENNSYLVANIA:

AND

NOW,

omes

h e

P e n n s y l v a n i a

O f f i c e

of

t t o r n e y G e n e r a l

by

K a t h l e e n

G.

Kane,

A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l of h e Commonwealth of e n n s y l v a n i a ,

and

James

P.

B a r k e r , Chief Deputy

A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l , who

i l e s

t h i s Motion o r Leave o F i l e A p p l i c a t i o n f o r

R e l i e f

under

S e a l , and

i n s u p p o r t t h e r e o f av e r s a s f o l l o w s :

1 . C o n c u r r e n t w i t h t h e f i l i n g of h i s Motion, e t i t i o n e r , O f f i c e of t t o r n e y G e n e r a l

of h e Commonwealth of e n n s y l v a n i a OAG) y K a t h l e e n Kane, t t o r n e y

G e n e r a l ,

i s f i l i n g

an

A p p l i c a t i o n f o r S p e c i a l R e l i e f p u r s u a n t t o 4 2 a . C . S . §§ 502, 726,

a . R . A . P . 3309.

2 . By

t s A p p l i c a t i o n

f o r S p e c i a l R e l i e f , OAG e e k s

t o c h a l l e n g e t h e i s s u a n c e of a


by

t h e


Judge of h e T h i r t y - F i f t h

S t a t e w i d e I n v e s t i g a t i n g Grand

J u r y .

UNSEALED PER ORDER OF

THE COURT DATED

AUGUST 26, 2015


35/61

3 . Of e c e s s i t y , t h e

A p p l i c a t i o n f o r

S p e c i a l

R e l i e f

r e c i t e s m a t t e r s o c c u r r i n g

b e f o r e

t h e Grand J u r y a n d / o r m a t t e r s s u b j e c t t o

S e a l i n g O r d e r s

s i g n e d by h e S u p e r v i s i n g

Judge of

h e


S t a t e w i d e I n v e s t i g a t i n g Grand J u r y .

WHEREFORE,

h e P e n n s y l v a n i a O f f i c e of A t t o r n e y

G e n e r a l ,

t h r o u g h t h e A t t o r n e y

G e n e r a l

and u n d e r s i g n e d c o u n s e l , r e s p e c t f u l l y r e q u e s t s t h a t

t h i s

Honorable Court n t e r an

Order

g r a n t i n g

t h i s

Motion

o r

Leave

o F i l e A p p l i c a t i o n f o r

R e l i e f

under

S e a l and

e a l i n g t h i s Motion,

t h e A p p l i c a t i o n of h e O f f i c e of t t o r n e y G e n e r a l

f o r S p e c i a l R e l i e f p u r s u a n t t o 4 2 a . C . S . §§

502, 726, a . R . A . P . 3309, and any u t u r e documents i l e d i n

t h i s

m a t t e r p e n d i n g f u r t h e r Order of

C o u r t .

OFFICEOF

TTORNEY

GENERAL

CriminalLaw ivision

Appeals a n d

Legal Services Secti on

1 6

th

Floor-Strawberry Square

Harrisburg,PA 7120

717)

05-0098

Fax)

717)

83-5431

Date: September 19, 014

By :

2

Respectfully

submitted,

KATHLEEN G.K NE

Attorney

General

L WRENCE

M.

HERBA

Executive Deputy Attorney General

Director,

Criminal

Law ivision

JAMES .BARKER

Chief

Deputy

Attorney General

Attorney No.

7315

[email protected]


36/61

VERIFICATION

The f a c t s r e c i t e d i n t h e

f o r e g o i n g

Commonweal th’s Answer t o

P e t i t i o n f o r

Review

a r e

t r u e and o r r e c t t o t h e b e s t

of

my nowledge and

b e l i e f . T h i s

s t a t e m e n t i s made w i t h

knowledge

t h a t a a l s e

s t a t e m e n t

i s

p u n i s h a b l e

by law under 18 Pa. C.S . § 9 0 4 b ) .

By:

AMES

.

BARKER

Chief

Deputy Attorney General

Attorney No. 7315

OFFICE

OF

TTORNEY GENERAL

CriminalLaw ivision

Appeals egal Services Sectio n

1 6

th

Flo or—Strawbe rry Square

Harrisburg,PA

7120

717)

05-0098

Date: September 19, 014

3


37/61

CERTIFICATE

OF

ERVICE

I

hereby

e r t i f y

t h a t

I am h i s

day e r v i n g one copy

of

h e f o r e g o i n g Motion o r Leave o

F i l e A p p l i c a t i o n

f o r

R e l i e f under S e a l upon h e p e r s o n s and n t h e manner

n d i c a t e d

below:

Via

U.S.

First-Class

Mail,

Postage pre-paid:

The Honorable Wil liam R.

a r p e n t e r

Thomas

E.

a r l u c c i o ,

E s q u i r e

Court ofCommon

l e a s

of ontgomery

County Plymouth

Greene O f f i c e

Campus

Montgomery County o u r t h o u s e 1000

Germantown

i k e ,

S u i t e

D3

P.O.Box 311 Plymouth M e e t i n g ,PA 19462-2484

N o r r i s t o w n ,PA 9404-031 1 484) 74-2899

610) 78-5902

S p e c i a l

P r o s e c u t o r )


Judge)

Ann Thornburg Weiss, l e r k of o u r t s

Montgomery County

l e r k of

o u r t s O f f i c e

P.O.

Box 311

N o r r i s t o w n ,PA 9404-031 1

610) 78-3346

C l e r k of o u r t s )

By:

AMES .BARKER

Chief

Deputy

Attorney General

Attorney No.

7315

OFFICE

OF

TTORNEY GENERAL

CriminalLaw ivision

Appeals egal Services

Section

1 6

th

Floor-Strawberry Square

Harrisburg,PA 7120

717)

05-0098

Date: September 19,

014

4


38/61

IN

THE

COURT OF

COMMON

PLEAS

MONTGOMERY

COUNTY,

ENNSYLVANIA

IN

RE:

THE

HIRTY-FIVE

STATEWIDE

INVESTIGATING

GRAND

URY

:

SUPREME

COURT

OF

PENNSYLVANIA

:

NO.

37

.D.

MISC.

DKT.

014

:

MONTGOMERY

COUNTY

COMMON

PLEAS

:

M.D.

1424-2014

SEALING

ORDER

AND

NOW,

h i s 24th

day of S e p t e r n b e r ,

2014, t

i s

hereby

ORDERED,

h a t

t h e

a t t a c h e d

Answers and

Orders of

September 24,

2014

be

i l e d

under e a l

w i t h t h e

Supreme

Court

n t i l

f u r t h e r

Order

of h a t

C o u r t .

BY

THE

COURT:

WILLIAM .

CARPE TER,

J .

Supervising Jud g e

UNSEALED PER ORDER

OF THE COURT DATED

AUGUST 26, 2015


39/61

IN

THE OURT

OF

OMMON LEAS

MONTGOMERY

COUNTY

ENNSYLVANIA

IN

RE:

THE

THIRTY-FIVE

STATEWIDE

INVESTIGATING GRAND JURY

:

SUPREME

COURTOF

PENNSYLVANIA

:

NO.

137 M.D.

MISC.

DKT.

2014

:

MONTGOMERYCOUNTY

OMMON

PLEAS

:

M.D.

1424-2014

SEALING

ORDER

AND NOW

h i s

24th day

of

September

2014 t i s

hereby ORDERED h a t

t h e

a t t a c h e d

Answers and Orders

of

e p t e r n b e r 24

2014

be

f i l e d under e a l w i t h

t h e

C l e r k of

Courts

of

Montgomery County

u n t i l

f u r t h e r

Order

of h i s

C o u r t

BY

THE

COURT:

t ,

WILLIAM

R.

CAR

ENTER

J

Supervising Judge


40/61

IN THE

SUPREME

COURTOF

PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE

ISTRICT

IN

RE:

THE

HIRTY-FIFTH

STATEWIDE

:

NO.

37

MM

014

INVESTIGATING

GRAND

JURY

FILED

UNDERSEAL

V.

PETITION O F:

THE

FFICE

OF

ATTORNEY

GENERAL :

ANSWERTOTHE

APPLICATIONOF

THE

FFICE

OF

THE

ATTORNEY

GENERAL

FOR

PECIAL

RELIEF

PURSUANT

TO §502,

26,

a.R.A.P. 3309

TO

THEHONORABLE

HIEF JUSTICE AND USTICES

OFTHE

SUPREME

COURT

OF

ENNSYLVANIA:

AND NOW,

omes

Thomas

. Carluccio,

Esquire,

Special

Prosecutor

for

the


Statewide

n v e s t i g a t i n g

Grand Jury,

who i l e s

t h i s A n s w e r

to

the

Application of

the

O f f i c e

of

Attorney Genera l

for


Pursuant

to

§§502,

26,

a . R . A . P .

3309, nd

in

suppor t

thereof

answe rs

as follows:

I

PARTIES

1.

Admi t t ed.

2. Denied,

o

the extent

that

h i s

Special

Prosecutor has no

no w l e d g e

as

to

w h a t h e

O f f i c e of t h e

Attorney

Genera l of

t h e

Conunonweal t h

of

Pennsylvania

OAG)

nows nd

doesn t know

b o u t

the

d e n t i t y

of

a ny

Respondent.

I L .

JURISDICTION

3. Admi t t ed, n

p a r t , that

Applicant h as o r r e c t l y c i t e d

Section 726 of

the

J u d i c i a l

Code. Denied, n

p a r t , that t h e Court h as

u r i s d i c t i o n

of

h i s matter

pursuant

to

Section

726 of

the

J u d i c i a l

Code.

I I I

BACKGROUND

4.

Denied,

o

the ext ent that A p p e n d i x

A

ppea rs

to

b e

a

w r i t i n g t h a t

speaks for t s e l f .

5. Admi t t ed.

8/20/2019 137 M M2014 Order and Att

137 m m2014 order and attachments - 004672

Documents