Kathleen Kane Formally Arraigned

Kane-MugshotThe Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania was formally arraigned and charged today.

No one saw it, though, and Kane never set foot in the courtroom.

Judge Cathleen Kelly Rebar allowed the AG to appear by video conference and reporters were only allowed to listen to audio from the courtroom.

The scene in the courtroom was actually quite peculiar.

The Judge angled the screen that Kane appeared on so that it only faced her. The Judge stated that she always did things this way.

When reporters objected to this action and the fact that no official court reporter was present, Judge Rebar replied that “this is a court of no record.”

Kane was fingerprinted, photographed for a mug shot and released on a $10,000 unsecured bond.

As was revealed on Thursday, Kane is charged with obstructing administration of law or other government function, official oppression, criminal conspiracy, perjury and false swearing.

They amounted to eight charges in total, one felony and seven misdemeanors.

The Attorney General chose not to speak, dodging a phalanx of reporters through a side door.

Her lawyer, Ross Kramer reiterated Kane’s claims that she is innocent and will not resign.

The next step, a preliminary hearing, is set for August 24th.

August 8th, 2015 | Posted in Front Page Stories, Harrisburg, Top Stories | 13 Comments

13 thoughts on “Kathleen Kane Formally Arraigned”

  1. Stephnie says:

    Great write-up, I am regular visitor of one’s website, maintain up the nice operate, and It’s going to be a regular visitor for a long time.

    http://animingle.com/blog/83982/sellling-your-house-looking-for-good-advice-on-the-subject-read-this/

  2. rsklaroff says:

    @ DD:

    Let’s annotate your reply….

    I’ve said from the beginning that the grand jury info was info that should have been public in the first place (aside from the error in redacting Mondesire).

    –Is there not a procedure that, in your judgment, would have permitted its release [such as acquiring the appropriate judicial order prospectively]?

    –Illustrative of the aforementioned “oversight” is the [confirmed] chance that an [inadvertent?] error would occur and, thus, is it not faulty for her to have created the possibility of such an event [absence of redaction] to have occurred in the first place?

    –Is relaying data to the media the proper method to attain the stated [anti-Fina] goal, or is there not a preferred method that complies with law and practice?

    So, the “leak” (and I think she’s acknowledged authorizing its release) is not a crime because it reveals the poor performance of a public servant (Fina).

    –Now that you admit she admitted she leaked, can you now cite statute that permits her to have done so [to anyone, media or otherwise]?

    Grand jury secrecy shouldn’t apply to the actions of the prosecutors and how they mishandle their jobs.

    –You raise a “shudda/cudda” claim, so can you cite precedent that corroborates the capacity of the AG to leak aforementioned data regarding an alleged job-performance issue?

  3. David Diano says:

    rsklaroff-

    I’ve said from the beginning that the grand jury info was info that should have been public in the first place (aside from the error in redacting Mondesire). So, the “leak” (and I think she’s acknowledged authorizing its release) is not a crime because it reveals the poor performance of a public servant (Fina). Grand jury secrecy shouldn’t apply to the actions of the prosecutors and how they mishandle their jobs.

  4. rsklaroff says:

    @ DD:

    Quit invoking the colorful lingo and jousting and then, after re-reading what was posted during the 100+ entry set of comments elsewhere, answer the simple question [based upon everything you know, including from the text of the indictment]:

    Did AG-Kane leak any Grand Jury data?

    http://www.politicspa.com/breaking-ag-kathleen-kane-charged/68224/#comments

  5. rsklaroff says:

    Rick, she’s still in-office.

  6. Rick says:

    This lady was a thorn in Pennsylvania’s side. Glad to see her gone. Typical PA democrat liberal….

  7. KSDF says:

    @nick, watcher’s right. MDJ hearings are not on the record.

  8. watcher says:

    A rather strange reply? “”This is a court of no record.”

    Idiot (Nick)– the judge said that because magisterial district courts ARE NOT COURTS OF RECORD. Duh.

    If you don’t know what you’re talking about, don’t write it. Even better, if you don’t understand something, call a knowledgeable source and ask– that’s a novel idea.

  9. jmarshak says:

    Well DD, we all know you’ve been pleasuring yourself with pictures of Kathleen Kane since she was elected.

  10. aaron says:

    Yikes. You guys need to get out more.

  11. KanesDriver says:

    No more so than you do on a daily basis looking at her pictures on this website.

  12. bungy says:

    Yes we did.

  13. David Diano says:

    I suspect the Kane’s adversaries and political opponents spent much of the day pleasuring themselves (and maybe each other) over pictures of Kane entering the courthouse.

Comments are closed.