Montco D.A.: Kane can get fair trial in county

HARRISBURG - Montgomery County prosecutors said Friday that Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen G. Kane can receive a fair trial in the county despite her claim that the entire bench there could be biased against her.

In a 42-page filing, county District Attorney Kevin R. Steele fought Kane's request last week that a judge from outside Montgomery County be appointed to preside over her criminal trial, scheduled to begin Aug. 8.

Kane has alleged that the judge assigned to her case, Wendy Demchick-Alloy, as well as the other judges in Montgomery County are too close to three county judges who she claims are hostile to her and have a "clear interest" in the outcome of her case.

Steele's response Friday was that Kane had failed to present any evidence of prejudice or bias.

He rebuffed her assertions that the three judges - William R. Carpenter, Carolyn T. Carluccio, and Risa Vetri Ferman - harbored any ill will against her or had any stake in the outcome of her trial.

Carpenter oversaw the initial grand jury investigation into whether Kane leaked confidential information to the Daily News that she believed would embarrass a former state prosecutor with whom she was feuding.

Carluccio is married to Tom Carluccio, the special prosecutor who led the grand jury investigation. He referred his findings on Kane to Ferman, who until early this year was district attorney.

Ferman conducted an independent inquiry, and it was under her watch that Kane was charged last year with perjury, false swearing, official oppression, and other crimes for allegedly leaking the secret information.

Kane, 49, a Democrat, has pleaded not guilty.

Kane "has failed to demonstrate any reasonable basis for this court - let alone the entire Montgomery County bench - to recuse itself," Steele wrote, adding that the three judges are not involved in her trial and that Kane has not even argued that Demchick-Alloy is in any way prejudiced against her.

"Indeed, defendant completely ignores the presumption that judges of this commonwealth are fair and impartial," Steele said.

Kane also had alleged that the case against her should be tossed because Tom Carluccio's original appointment was unconstitutional and the methods he used to investigate her - including issuing subpoenas and using an investigative grand jury - were beyond the scope of his powers.

Steele said that argument was a variation of one Kane made unsuccessfully to the state Supreme Court in 2014, and that she "is simply trying to get a second bite at the apple of her claim."

Kane's defense lawyers have signaled in court papers that she intends to claim that she was a "victim of selective and vindictive prosecution."

But she has yet to present a legal argument for that assertion - in a recent court filing, her lawyers redacted the claim, and the section was left blank.

Steele said Friday that he would await a full argument by her defense team before responding to that claim.

acouloumbis@phillynews.com

717-787-5934 @AngelasInk