Who does a county DA answer to?

[djturnz]

Who has power/ influence over a county district attorney's office? I would assume that a state congressman would have no influence. I am keeping this vague for now. I feel that a specific county DA is not doing his job and I'd like to know who to point it out to. Maybe light a fire under him.

[Rule10b5]

The voters, basically.

District Attorneys are directly elected in Pennsylvania. Sure, they can be removed from office for misconduct, or investigated by the Attorney General, or by the Pa. Supreme Court for ethical violations, but they don't really have a "boss" that you can complain to. The AG isn't his boss, because the AG represents the Commonwealth directly, the DA represents the Commonwealth for matters in his county that don't have statewide implications. The two aren't part of a hierarchy, but rather, separate parts of the Commonwealth's judicial system. It's like the difference between the State Troopers and your local police department. They both have authority in your county, but the head of the ST can't tell your local chief what to do unless he has jurisdiction over a specific issue.

You could call your state rep, and he could call a DA or call for an investigation, but why would he do that unless he has a bone to pick (in which case he'd already be on it)?

What is the nature of your complaint regarding your DA?

If it's just a "he's not doing his job good enough" you're shit outta luck. Call whatever party endorses him, and let them know. If you have specific ethical concerns, call the AG or the Pa. Supreme Court.

[T Durdin]

Probably the county commissioners. If it were an ethics violation, possibly the state ethics commission.

[Rule10b5]

Originally Posted by T Durdin

Probably the county commissioners. If it were an ethics violation, possibly the state ethics commission.

Good, thought, but the DA does not answer to a county commissioner. A DA is a row officer -- elected and serves independently. They work together, obviously, but the DA has his own office. It's not like the Mayor/Chief of Police relationship. More like Governor/AG. They can both make trouble for each other, but neither one answers to the other.

The State Ethics Commission is a possibility, but only if the ethical violation is financial in nature. For an ethics complaint the Pa. Supreme Court is the best shot -- he's a lawyer and they have direct jurisdiction regarding his conduct and membership in the bar.

[djturnz]

Well there was a murder trial and the accused was aquitted. The star witness was the guys wife and she admitted on the stand to destroying evidence, giving false statements to the police, and she was there during the murder. She also had charges of receiving stolen property from an unrelated incident. During the trial, she was asked (by the defense attorney) on the stand if she was getting immunity or a deal for her testimony and she said no. They also asked if they were going to drop the stolen property charges for her cooperation, again she said no.

It was in the paper this morning that the DA just dropped the charges for the stolen property. And no charges were going to be filed for her evidence tampering.

It's BS that just because they couldn't prove that her husband was there and she was that they drop that case, and now they drop these charges as well.

Anybody else that destroys evidence in amurder would be looking at a couple years at least.

[Rule10b5]

Originally Posted by djturnz

Well there was a murder trial and the accused was aquitted. The star witness was the guys wife and she admitted on the stand to destroying evidence, giving false statements to the police, and she was there during the murder. She also had charges of receiving stolen property from an unrelated incident. During the trial, she was asked (by the defense attorney) on the stand if she was getting immunity or a deal for her testimony and she said no. They also asked if they were going to drop the stolen property charges for her cooperation, again she said no.

It was in the paper this morning that the DA just dropped the charges for the stolen property. And no charges were going to be filed for her evidence tampering.

It's BS that just because they couldn't prove that her husband was there and she was that they drop that case, and now they drop these charges as well.

Anybody else that destroys evidence in amurder would be looking at a couple years at least.

Sounds like a horrible result. Sadly, though, there isn't anything you can do about it. I don't see an ethics violation by the DA. They may not have offered her a deal, but they may have said: "Be honest and we'll take care of you." There is nothing ethically compromising about that at all. If a DA decides to grant immunity in exchange for testimony, officially or not, it is absolutely his call. It's one of their greatest powers, to be honest. The DA is the person who makes the ultimate decision whether to pursue charges. Basically, it's his call, and if he doesn't want to prosecute, there isn't much you can do.

You can complain about the result to the heads of his local party, but you aren't going to get anywhere. "I disagree with the DAs decision" will get you a polite nod to your face, maybe a letter talking about how they appreciate your concerns, but that's where it will end unless you have actual evidence of an ethical or legal violation.

My suggestion: Campaign against him when he's next up for election. Support the other guy, and be honest about why you're doing it -- because in "X" case, the DA dropped the ball.

Disheartening, but I hope it helps a bit

[T Durdin]

I'm no lawyer, but I understand that a DA isn't the only one who can file criminal charges in Commonwealth court.

If there's been such a miscarriage of justice and you can afford the fees, a private attorney can file criminal charges against this woman. If there's compelling evidence I guess she might even get convicted; like her staement on the stand under oath stating she destroyed evidence. I don't know how often it comes up, or if anyone is ever convicted in a case like that but I was told by an attorney that such a thing was possible.

If she didn't get convicted, she'd still face the financial burden of defending against the charges.

In that case I was speaking about- my dad had died and my stepmom and her kids basically stole property from the estate. The cops refused to get involved; the lawyer we met with told us he couldn't get stepmom, but for a fee he could make her kids regret looting the place.

Rule10b5 may be able to tell us if that's true, and what kind of evidence and expense such an action would necessitate.

[ar15jules]

I think you may need to do some more research before you make a stink. Where you in the courtroom? Where you present for interviews of all of the witnesses or even the defendant? What kind of "deal" was actually made? My point is, you can't make a decision on any of this by what you have read in the news. While the information printed may have been the truth, it may not have been the whole truth. Quite frankly, you will probably never know the whole truth. The paper did their job, and got you fired up.
Jules

[djturnz]

Thanks for everyones input.

The guy that was murdered was one of my best friends, and has been for 8 years. I was in the court room, and at the preliminary hearing.