Kane/Fina Feud Worsens During Grand Jury Trial

KaneThe drama continues.

Attorney General Kathleen Kane appeared before a grand jury today to address accusations that her office leaked secret information regarding the 2009 investigation into the finances of former NAACP head, Whyatt Mondesire, to humiliate political foe Frank Fina.

Kane, who released the information to The Philadelphia Daily News, has argued that not only did the leak not break any laws, but she was acting in the interest of transparency.

The Mondesire case, however, was prosecuted by Frank Fina who has become Kane’s longtime adversary. The feud began in 2012, when Kane criticized how Fina and former Attorney General Tom Corbett handled the Jerry Sandusky scandal. It snowballed when it was revealed that Fina was among those who circulated pornographic emails during Tom Corbett’s tenure as Attorney General.

The feud escalated last March when Kane shutdown Fina’s three-year sting investigation into several Philadelphia public officials accused of accepting bribe.

Finally, Kane was outraged by a court ruling Fina received that forbid Kane from releasing the information she had tying him to the media-dubbed “porngate” scandal during Tom Corbett’s time as Attorney General.

Kane believes the ruling has restricted her ability to remain transparent and hold all public officials to the standards their office demands.

Kane cited in a press release that “the public has a right know what public officials are doing or not doing with tax payer dollars.” She then addressed the restrictions the Fina ruling has placed on her ability to do her job, saying carefully that certain “court orders expose me to legal risk if I do my job as attorney general that I was elected and trusted by the people of Pennsylvania to do.”

Kane, represented by Lanny Davis, former White House aide during the Clinton administration, and New York defense attorney Gerald Shargel, has refused to elaborate on her statement and whether she invoked her Fifth Amendment rights.*

Special Prosecutor Thomas Carluccio subpoenaed Kane to appear in front of a Montgomery County grand jury three times prior. Her first appearance was moved due to scheduling conflicts, and her October 21st appearance was cancelled after Kane was in a car accident early that morning. In the recent weeks, Kane was said to be suffering from lingering effects resulting from a concession she obtained during that crash.

Though she has previously been working out of her home, Kane was cleared to return to work “as tolerable” this week and testified in Norristown today.

*Note: This article originally incorrectly indicated that Kane’s lawyers said she had invoked the Fifth Amendment during testimony.

November 17th, 2014 | Posted in Front Page Stories, Harrisburg, Top Stories | 11 Comments

11 thoughts on “Kane/Fina Feud Worsens During Grand Jury Trial”

  1. Terance Healy says:

    When Judge Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio wanted to secretly cancel hearings she did so via email.

    The Courthouse was stunned to learn that I had the praecipe numbers which indicated that multiple hearings had been cancelled by email. No one would take responsibility or explain.
    Court Administration had cancelled the hearings without notice or entry… and without Court Order.

    When Judge Carluccio was asked about the cancellations SHE LIED indicating it was an error. At the end of that session, she forgot so I reminded her to reschedule. She did.

    THEN, she cancelled those rescheduled hearings by email – without notice AGAIN. So, much for the ‘error’ excuse.

    Well, all but one was cancelled. A 15 minute window. If I did not appear for that hearing she could use THAT as the excuse to ignore and dismiss ALL the petitions. BUT, I showed up prepared to address all 15 matters. There was no hearings. Cancelled Without Notice… AGAIN.

    Where was the opposing party? Their setup was exposed. They had written indicating they were aware of the hearing, BUT THEY DID NOT SHOW UP. I got their letter 2 days later. BOY, THEIR SETUP WAS EXPOSED. EPIC FAIL:

    The judge had indicated to Court Administration on the day before that she would neither confirm or deny the hearing was scheduled. WTF? Cheryl Leslie in Court Admin knew that the corruption was overwhelming in this matter. She could not explain the irrational lack of explanation. She knew, but could not explain. I knew too. They went to great lengths to fool a litigant and failed.

    WHERE NO ONE EVER ASKED FOR THE DIVORCE DECREE, WHY WOULD JUDGE CARLUCCIO ISSUE ONE?

    Carluccio issued a defective and void Divorce Decree in violation of PA Law and without any jurisdiction. The court was notified of the error. The deliberately defective and void order is being used to continue to ruin my life where everyone is ignoring the volume of information indicating it is void. Pretending the divorce decree is valid prevents any filing to address all those cancelled petitions on financial issues. It keeps the litigation going… an additional 4 years now in the Superior Court.

    Fraud to conceal fraud and prevent any resolution of the fraud is what Rule 1.6 does to litigants in all kinds of injustice cases. Foreclosures, false imprisonment, false prosecution,…

    Judges issue void orders deliberately because they know how other judges won’t act where the error is exposed… or corrected. The subsequent judges commit fraud and act to further the error.

    BUT, RULE 1.6 is UNCONSTITUTIONAL…. and those acts of fraud cannot be excused by an unconstitutional law.

    Considering the effort of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania towards silencing the availability of emails – they updated Rule 1.6 about 7-8 times in the last 2 years… the Supreme Court knows there is something in emails that will demonstrate the abuse of power within the courts. Why are they updating an UNCONSTITUTIONAL law?

    Rule 1.6 is unconstitutional, it causes a denial of constitutionally protected rights, it permits fraud to conceal fraud, it permits EVERY effort to conceal the fraud, it made fraud ‘legal’ for legal professionals… and MANDATORY, AND THEY CALLED IT ETHICAL.

    When the American Bar Association had the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania enact Rule 1.6 into law where they DID NOT HAVE AUTHORITY to enact ANY law which affects substantive rights of a litigant which are guaranteed by the US Constitution.

    Rule 1.6 is about concealing corruption and fraud within the judicial branch.
    Rule 1.6 is an aggressively enforced MANDATE of Confidentiality.
    Rule 1.6 is NOT ethical, yet is referenced throughout the ‘ethical standard for legal professionals’
    Rule 1.6 has permitted the American Bar Association to undermine the judiciary.
    Rule 1.6 has concealed the ABA infiltration between the people and the courts, where the ABA staff intercepts and interferes with the administration of justice and prevents access to the courts.
    Rule 1.6 is not helping the judiciary. The ABA is concealing that they have caused the judiciary to be UNDONE.
    Rule 1.6 is holding the judiciary hostage with the threat of exposing that the judicial branch has been usurped and undermined by the American Bar Association.
    BUT, Rule 1.6 is UNCONSTITUTIONAL. A NULLITY. NO LAW. NEVER REALLY WAS A LAW. NEVER EXISTED.

    So when concealing how Rule 1.6 has caused a systemic problem within the judiciary, who better to approach the topic than a Special Prosecutor named CARLUCCIO.

    Special Prosecutor Carluccio should know and understand the issues related to emails, Rule 1.6, concealing corruption, excusing fraud, denying constitutional rights as his wife, Judge Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio WAS DOING ALL OF THOSE THINGS IN HER COURTROOM.

    In Healy v Healy when Judge Carluccio’s corruption was exposed she improperly issued a defective and void order calling it a divorce decree and using it to destroy a litigant who survived. That order lacked jurisdiction. It will NEVER have jurisdiction. So every subsequent judge involved IGNORES THE FAILURE and continues to attack her victim.

    The Central Legal Staff of the Superior Court assumed the mantle of Rule 1.6 fraud, BUT WITHOUT THE PROTECTION of RULE 1.6 because their crimes PROVE the unconstitutional effect. RULE 1.6 is PROVEN to be unconstitutional within the Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

    NO DECISION OR ORDER HAS BEEN SIGNED BY ANY JUDGE. Rule 1.6 fraud concealing fraud…. but clearly without benefit of the hostage judge’s participation. A VIOLATION OF PENNSYLVANIA LAW, the Rules of Appellate Procedure, the US Constitution, and Federal Crimes.

    When Judge Carluccio used emails and void orders to conceal her corruption and injustice, she was also concealing that the American Bar Association had undermined the judiciary at state and federal levels.

    At the time, Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio was also the President of the Montgomery County Bar Association.

    Special Prosecutor Carluccio knows exactly what he is trying to conceal and his effort to permit continuing corruption is very clearly motivated.

    He also knows his wife is dumb as a rock. She didn’t think this up all by herself. She had no concept of her conflict of interest in real estate dealings. She made up laws from the bench with the belief that litigants are fools. She prevented the Barnes Foundation from remaining in Montgomery County by concealing available funds. She worked for the US Attorney for a while so she avoids federal investigation unless they bring someone in from outside the area.

    Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio is a judicial terrorist.

    UNCONSTITUTIONAL Rule 1.6 is not going to hide her abuse of power under color of law with intent to cause harm and irreparable damage…. and neither will her husband.

    SO WHY SPEND SO MUCH TIME TRYING TO CONCEAL ACTIONS BEHIND AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAW? It’s been concealed since 1988 while the injustice destroyed people and families who could not turn to any legal professionals for resolution.

    It’s never going to be constitutional, lawful, ethical or good to commit, enable or conceal judicial corruption.

    So much effort to enable corruption to continue.

    CARLUCCIO’s don’t seem to have any grasp of CONFLICT OF INTEREST.

    All this effort to mandate Kathleen Kane to be quiet about Rule 1.6 injustice and corruption – the thing she cannot reveal… while it destroys lives, and leads to suicide.

    In the meantime, I am available to inform the Grand Jury, and the public, of what it is they won’t allow the Attorney General to discuss.

    I AM NOT RESTRICTED BY RULE 1.6 UNCONSTITUTIONAL CONFIDENTIALITY.

  2. Brad Kirsch says:

    I believe that Judicial restraint on Grand Jury testimony makes it impossible for any public official to be open to scrutiny by means of a contrived delay that can be engineered to keep a public official shielded. Thus, if the actions of a public official are not subject to immediate scrutiny because of a jury investigation (and the possibility exists that an investigation be put before the jury to evade immediate public scrutiny) – this sets up a situation wherein the public policy interests become subordinate.

    Subordination of the public’s need to know is not wise or beneficial. One branch of the system be given such power to delay the public interest in open government seems to be archaic.

    All that has to happen according to this present situation is for someone to get an investigation and negative evidence toward an errant official entered into the record and then no one can refer to the (possible misdeed) because it is under investigation.

    This delays free speech about deeds for critical public officers to be censored by a singular jury panel that may (because of this law) be able to forestall any actions to remove a possibly stained individual from public scrutiny in time to save the publics interest.

    This puts the judicial system in conflict with the general publics political interests.

  3. This feud is a sorry and embarrassing mess. How can the people of Pennsylvania have any faith in our justice system if the impetus is seemingly always to embarrass or harass an “enemy” with in the system? The pornn mail was a Statewide humiliation enough- is there any hope for maturity and sanity to return to the Pennsylvania Court system?

  4. Larry says:

    Peggy, no. Fina does not have problems with women. He has problems with unqualified, incompetent hacks who buy their offices and use them for political purposes. Fina has far more experience than Kane as a prosecutor. She continues to show how inexperienced she is.

  5. Peggy says:

    Fina has a problem with Attorney General Kane because 1) She is a women who is intelligent and 2) she is Democrat. Why should Fina and Eagen get a free ride with the porn emails? Release all of them and let the chips fall where they may.

  6. elroy hirsch says:

    Chief Justice Castille granted the Montgomery County Grand Jury permission to establish a Special Prosecutor to investigate Grand Jury leaks involving the investigation of Wyatt Montesire.

    The target is AG Kane. The issue gathered from this article is the Fina/Kane feud. Castille wants all the pornographic emails that Kane has involving judges to be released. The Special Prosecutor is trying to shut down Kane thus saving Fina.

    Is Castille now concerned about the breath of this scandal and wants to help shut down Kane?

  7. You Bet says:

    Larry said exactly what was in my mind. Where does someone come up with the term “grand jury trial”? In the years since Keegan left this site, it has become a source for under-researched, slapdash items that reflect an absence of even basic grasp of subjects.

  8. Larry says:

    There’s no such thing as a “grand jury trial.”

  9. elroy hirsch says:

    What was the result of the Grand Jury leak investigation conducted in 2013? Judge Feudale started it regarding the Sandusky and DeNapoles Grand Jury leaks. Two former prosecutors under Corbett lead the investigation. It is assumed that Fina benefited from the Grand Jury leaks when he was the head OAG prosecutor. This all ties together.

  10. huh says:

    Are stories for this website ever edited? Not just glanced over and posted? Each day there seems to be a story with some sort of spelling or grammatical error. Be professional!

Comments are closed.