The issue of the emails did come up at Monday’s preliminary hearing, at which a district court judge ruled that there was enough evidence for prosecutors to continue their case against Kane.
Advertisement
A judge rejected her lawyer’s contention she had another way of humiliating the rival prosecutor: pornography.
Pennsylvania attorney general Kathleen Kane faces perjury and obstruction charges for allegedly leaking grand jury information to discredit a political rival.
Defense Attorney Gerald Shargell addressed reporters after the four hour hearing.
Fina, reached by phone, declined to comment on Shargel’s argument.
Nearly half of Pennsylvania voters want Kathleen Kane, the state’s embattled Democratic attorney general, to step down, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released Tuesday.
The eight charges Kane is facing include one felony charge of perjury.
Kane remains free pending an October 14 court appearance.
Prosecutors called two witnesses during the hearing – a top Kane aide and the lead investigator in the case against her – whose testimony paralleled a 42-page probable cause affidavit filed against her earlier this month.
Inside the courtroom, Kane sat quietly at the defense table, flipping through documents and jotting notes, as prosecutors outlined how they believe she passed a transcript and memorandum related to a 2009 grand jury investigation to a Philadelphia Daily News reporter previous year . Shargel said he couldn’t lose his reputation a second time.
Circumstances have changed with respect to the Right-To-Know requests now under appeal by the attorney general’s office to Commonwealth Court, said Kane in a news release.
Reese, 48, pleaded not guilty and is scheduled for trial September 9.
I am glad to see we have someone who has guts like Kane. Montgomery County prosecutors say Mr. Reese conducted queries of an email storage system in the attorney general’s office to gain access to confidential information.
Advertisement
A lawyer for Pennsylvania’s attorney general says charges that she used her position to smear a civil rights leader’s reputation are moot because he’d already been the subject of negative newspaper articles.
