Skip to content
Link copied to clipboard

Inquirer Editorial: Sting questions deserve answers

The sting that allegedly caught four Philadelphia legislators and a former city judge accepting gifts from a wire-wearing informant raises serious questions. What was the context and nature of the encounters between the elected officials and the lobbyist who allegedly passed them envelopes of money? What specific facts led Attorney General Kathleen Kane to shut down the operation initiated under her predecessors?

Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen Kane (left) listens as attorney Richard A. Sprague (right) speaks during a meeting March 20, 2014 at the offices of The Philadelphia Inquirer.    ( CLEM MURRAY / Staff Photographer )
Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen Kane (left) listens as attorney Richard A. Sprague (right) speaks during a meeting March 20, 2014 at the offices of The Philadelphia Inquirer. ( CLEM MURRAY / Staff Photographer )Read more

The sting that allegedly caught four Philadelphia legislators and a former city judge accepting gifts from a wire-wearing informant raises serious questions. What was the context and nature of the encounters between the elected officials and the lobbyist who allegedly passed them envelopes of money? What specific facts led Attorney General Kathleen Kane to shut down the operation initiated under her predecessors?

Such questions can be answered only by a release of the recordings and other records related to the case. That includes records in the fraud case against the informant, lobbyist Tyron B. Ali, which was dropped in exchange for his cooperation.

Kane's lawyer, Richard Sprague, told the Editorial Board Thursday that he will ask a judge to unseal the file related to Ali and his deal with prosecutors, which Kane has sharply criticized. That's good. But Kane should also release the recordings and other case files to the public, which has the greatest interest in the conduct of the accused officials. Sprague said it's not yet clear whether the recordings can be released.

Based on the accounts of sources familiar with the sting, The Inquirer reported this week that four Democratic state representatives allegedly accepted money: Ron Waters, $7,650; Vanessa Brown, $4,000; Michelle Brownlee, $3,500; and Louise Bishop, $1,500. Former Traffic Court Judge Thomasine Tynes was accused of taking a $2,000 bracelet.

Only Bishop has denied taking the money. Brownlee said she did not recall accepting anything. Waters said Ali may have given him something for his birthday. Brown declined to comment, but her lawyer said she did nothing wrong. Tynes confirmed getting the bracelet but said she did not know it was worth $2,000.

In spite of the recordings, Kane, a Democrat, said she killed the case because it was fatally flawed. But sources close to the sting vigorously dispute her assessment.

Even if Kane felt the case was shot, she had vital information about politicians' alleged proclivity to take wads of cash from a lobbyist. Could that have served as the starting point for a new investigation that met her standards? The state's elected top law enforcer declined to answer such questions - or any questions - in a meeting with the Inquirer Editorial Board Thursday. Although Kane requested the meeting, her lawyer, Sprague, accompanied and spoke for her.

But there is a widespread thirst for more information from the attorney general and others involved in the case. The House Ethics Committee could censure members if they broke rules requiring them to report gifts on their annual financial disclosures. Good-government activist Gene Stilp has filed complaints with that committee as well as the state Ethics Commission. The watchdog group Committee of Seventy has called for an independent counsel to examine the case and sort out conflicting and serious accusations of prosecutorial impropriety. Still missing in action, meanwhile, is the city's Democratic machine, which should be demanding that the officials explain themselves.

Only a release of all the related records can bring clarity to the confusion left in the wake of this unfinished investigation.