It remains to be seen how Attorney General Kathleen Kane will leave her position, but it’s becoming increasingly likely that it won’t be on her own accord.
After being arraigned on charges of obstructing administration of law or government function, official repression, criminal conspiracy, perjury and false swearing on Saturday, Kane held a press conference today where she denied her involvement in illegal activity.
“My defense will be I broke no laws of this Commonwealth. Period,” Kane said.
While the attorney general plans to fight this case to the bitter end, she may not still be the chief lawyer of the state by the time everything is said and done.
Dauphin County resident and political activist Gene Stilp has filed a petition with the PA Supreme Court Disciplinary Board to suspend Kane’s law license, which would leave her unable to continue in her role.
“There are more important things than wasting our time on an attorney general who’s been indicted,” Stilp told WITF’s Mary Wilson.
According to our ongoing reader poll, 28% think Kane will resign from office, while 30% believe she will leave when she is either convicted or impeached. Meanwhile, just 10% see Kane retaining her position in next November’s general election, but everyone could be wrong if the petition results in a law license suspension.
A preliminary hearing for Kane is scheduled for Aug. 24.
Is there currently an investigation underway as to who was leaking secret information from the grand jury that was investigating Kathleen Kane?
Larry: My reference was to Rule 93.101 of the Disciplinary Board Rules which states: “… complaints submitted to the Secretary or the Office of Disciplinary Counsel shall be confidential unless the matter results in the filing of formal charges” No charges have yet been filed by the Board thus the Complaint is confidential.
Larry; You are still wrong the rule I cited is a rule of general application in all disciplinary proceedings regardless of who starts the proceeding.See also rule 93-101 pf the DisciplimnaryBoard RsEE ALSOM pA.R.DE.
Pete, wrong again. You are actually awaiting “charges” based on a rule of disciplinary enforcement? Since when are the RDE a part of Title 18? Also, any consequences would apply only to a member of the PA Bar. Stilp is not a member of the PA Bar. Get a clue.
Larry: You are just plain wrong about the ability of the complaining party to publically release the complaint immediately upon its filing. See the Court rule at Pa.R.D.E.NO 402 (C) imposing confidentiality even upon the complaining party. You should read the rule before attacking others who have.I still await any action against the complaining party for his violation of the rules.
It may be desirable to continue this discussion on a newer thread:
If the filing of the petition is needed to trigger any sort of internal process, that’s fine with me; further, the Supremes are to govern all judicial processes in the Commonwealth, and if they were to collectively decide that justice will be marred in any case handled by the AG…might they not wish to preclude future retroactive proceedings???
Rsklaroff, the “filing” with ODC is no different than filing a complaint. There is an internal review process to make an initial determination as to whether there is any basis to open a file/inquiry, but it does not start a proceeding in court. This is a high profile matter and I am not sure given the pending charges that we will see an emergency petition for temporary suspension. For what it’s worth, to the extent a suspension would effectively remove the Attorney General from office, it might be viewed as a violation of the Separation of Powers Doctrine.
“We must remember always that accusation is not proof and that conviction depends upon evidence and due process of law.” – Edward R. Murrow
As I asked yesterday, does this filing trigger any proceedings?
Pete, there is nothing unlawful about Stilp disclosing his own complaint. You amateur lawyers are funny.
Let her be proven guilty before her license is suspended, if not, then her allegations of others and a large cover up will seem true. Other legislators did not have to resign until they were proven guilty.
Slip revealing his Disciplinary Complaint is a violation of the law because it is confidential and becomes public only if charges are filed by the Board. The question is will he be prosecuted for this violation.
As I said, Stilp is off-base here. Kane is on the correct path.
Gene do away. What a jerk! Kane has not been found guilty of anything!!!! I love how people are so nice!!!! Like a bunch of ugly sharks waiting for her blood. Maybe Church would help you. Or Medication!!!
Again GENE you are a JERK!!!
How can you suspend someone’s law license before they’ve been found guilty of anything? What happened to “innocent until proven guilty”? Wouldn’t suspending her license at this point, before a criminal trial, presume she is guilty?
This really is a non-story. I have practiced in the field of attorney ethics/discipline for over twenty years, ten with the Office of Disciplinary Counsel. A private citizen can file a complaint, but not what is known as a petition for emergency temporary suspension. That is the sole province of ODC. It is also worth note that complaints are supposed to be confidential unless or until certain conditions are present.
I respected Stilp in the past, but he is out on a limb here. Kathleen Kane will prevail.
Peggy says go for it Attorney General Kane. If they take your law license away, let’s find out who has the porn. Release those names and let the chips fall where they may – perhaps a Judge, perhaps a Prosecutor, or just perhaps. They wasted taxpayer dollars for their own gratification or perversion.
Clearly the action by Mr Stilp shows his loss of control of his faculties. Mr Stilp should have stayed in retirement waxing his Pink Pig !!
Once again Mr Stilp seeks a limelight for his antics that lack substance !!
Is it any wounder why this guy has failed at so many attempts at significance !!!
Give it up Gene enjoy retirement is the embarrassment really worth getting to read your own name in paper!!!!!
Didn’t this clown retire?
This will hopefully never happen again, but I agree with Observer’s assessment. Also, the charge is Official Oppression, not “repression.” And we don’t have indictments in PA, even though everyone keeps using that term.
This is a non-story. Stilp is and has always been a wackjob more interested in getting headlines than fixing anything. Also, the disciplinary process is much slower than any criminal proceeding, and they won’t take action until there is an adjuddication in the underlying crmiinal proceeding. That’s just how it works. And of course, when an attorney IS convicted, the Board undertakes the suspension process on its own – doesn’t need any grandstanding gadfly to tell it how to do its job.
To be fair, they’d only be wrong because you didn’t include the most likely outcome as a choice.