Did Larry Krasner Pressure Staff to Mislead a Federal Judge About a Murder-Conviction Appeal?
A federal judge disqualified Philadelphia DA Larry Krasner and a top aide from a murder-conviction appeal, declined to disqualify the District Attorney's Office, and referred all three to federal prosecutors, writing they may have violated the law. Krasner disputes the findings and plans to appeal.
BackgroundWhat is a conviction integrity unit?
Case period:
Published by The Dispute Index editorial teamPublished Updated
Overview
The dispute traces to Dennis Johnson v. Nickelson, a federal habeas corpus petition challenging Johnson's 2009 Philadelphia murder conviction. In November 2022, the DAO conceded habeas relief was warranted. In 2026, an internal DAO conflict arose over that filing: ADA Jaclyn Mason, who drafted it, resigned in June 2026, and a group of prosecutors moved to withdraw it. The Pennsylvania Attorney General's office separately urged Judge Diamond to disqualify Krasner and the DAO. Before the ruling, the DAO filed a declaration from Bruce A. Green, a Fordham Law School professor of legal ethics, who gave his opinion that neither Krasner nor the office had a conflict requiring recusal. Judge Diamond rejected that opinion, writing that Green had ignored facts bearing on the conflict question. Legal experts quoted by The Philadelphia Inquirer said judges sometimes refer possible wrongdoing to prosecutors, but that a federal judge referring an elected district attorney was close to unheard of. Lauren Ouziel, a Temple University law professor and former federal prosecutor, told the paper she could not think of an equivalent situation. The U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania has not confirmed whether it will act on the referral.
Background: What is a conviction integrity unit?
People in this case
Larry KrasnerDirectly involved
Martina WhiteCommented
Charles Fain LehmanCommented
Cully StimsonCommented
Timeline
18 timeline entries on this page. Dates: November 4, 2022 to October 20, 2026
November 2022
DAO concedes Dennis Johnson's habeas petition warrants relief
Incident
The Philadelphia DAO filed a brief conceding that Dennis Johnson's habeas corpus petition warranted relief.
[01]Memorandum, Johnson v. Nickelson, No. 2:15-cv-04965-PD (E.D. Pa. Sept. 15, 2026)
Source excerpt
I have thus reluctantly concluded that Philadelphia's highest law enforcement official and one of his top assistants may have violated the law. In these circumstances, with the issuance of this Memorandum, I refer the DAO, Mr. Krasner, and Stiegler to this District's United States Attorney's Office for investigation and other appropriate action.
Memorandum of Judge Paul S. Diamond, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, filed September 15, 2026, 40 pages. The quoted excerpt is the contiguous conclusion at page 39. A near-identical sentence appears in the opening summary at page 1. The memorandum disqualifies Krasner and Stiegler, declines to disqualify the District Attorney's Office, and refers all three to the United States Attorney's Office. It names obstruction of justice under 18 U.S.C. 1503 and criminal conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. 371 as the conduct it has in mind. A referral is not a charge.
Memorandum, Johnson v. Nickelson, No. 2:15-cv-04965-PD (E.D. Pa. Sept. 15, 2026)Doc. 173. Opening summary at p. 1; findings at pp. 17, 36-38; conclusion and referral at p. 39.
May 2026
Diamond orders live testimony and invites the state attorney general
Diamond schedules an evidentiary hearing in Dennis Johnson's case and orders live testimony from the identifying trial witnesses. He also invites the Pennsylvania Office of Attorney General to participate as a friend of the court. The September 15memorandum recounts the order and says the office agreed.
[01]Memorandum, Johnson v. Nickelson, No. 2:15-cv-04965-PD (E.D. Pa. Sept. 15, 2026)
Source excerpt
I have thus reluctantly concluded that Philadelphia's highest law enforcement official and one of his top assistants may have violated the law. In these circumstances, with the issuance of this Memorandum, I refer the DAO, Mr. Krasner, and Stiegler to this District's United States Attorney's Office for investigation and other appropriate action.
Memorandum of Judge Paul S. Diamond, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, filed September 15, 2026, 40 pages. The quoted excerpt is the contiguous conclusion at page 39. A near-identical sentence appears in the opening summary at page 1. The memorandum disqualifies Krasner and Stiegler, declines to disqualify the District Attorney's Office, and refers all three to the United States Attorney's Office. It names obstruction of justice under 18 U.S.C. 1503 and criminal conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. 371 as the conduct it has in mind. A referral is not a charge.
Memorandum, Johnson v. Nickelson, No. 2:15-cv-04965-PD (E.D. Pa. Sept. 15, 2026)Doc. 173. Opening summary at p. 1; findings at pp. 17, 36-38; conclusion and referral at p. 39.
June 2026
Jaclyn Mason submits her resignation to Krasner
Mason resigns after disputing how responsibility for the brief supporting relief would be presented to the court. Diamond later recounts her resignation letter and testimony, including her objection that Stiegler should acknowledge his role. The memorandum says the office ends her access that afternoon, although she had planned to finish the month.
[01]Memorandum, Johnson v. Nickelson, No. 2:15-cv-04965-PD (E.D. Pa. Sept. 15, 2026)
Source excerpt
I have thus reluctantly concluded that Philadelphia's highest law enforcement official and one of his top assistants may have violated the law. In these circumstances, with the issuance of this Memorandum, I refer the DAO, Mr. Krasner, and Stiegler to this District's United States Attorney's Office for investigation and other appropriate action.
Memorandum of Judge Paul S. Diamond, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, filed September 15, 2026, 40 pages. The quoted excerpt is the contiguous conclusion at page 39. A near-identical sentence appears in the opening summary at page 1. The memorandum disqualifies Krasner and Stiegler, declines to disqualify the District Attorney's Office, and refers all three to the United States Attorney's Office. It names obstruction of justice under 18 U.S.C. 1503 and criminal conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. 371 as the conduct it has in mind. A referral is not a charge.
Memorandum, Johnson v. Nickelson, No. 2:15-cv-04965-PD (E.D. Pa. Sept. 15, 2026)Doc. 173. Opening summary at p. 1; findings at pp. 17, 36-38; conclusion and referral at p. 39.District Attorney's Office moves to withdraw its 2022 brief supporting habeas relief
Four assistant district attorneys sign a motion to withdraw the filing conceding that Dennis Johnson should receive habeas relief. The motion says the earlier brief contained material misstatements.
[01]Memorandum, Johnson v. Nickelson, No. 2:15-cv-04965-PD (E.D. Pa. Sept. 15, 2026)
Source excerpt
I have thus reluctantly concluded that Philadelphia's highest law enforcement official and one of his top assistants may have violated the law. In these circumstances, with the issuance of this Memorandum, I refer the DAO, Mr. Krasner, and Stiegler to this District's United States Attorney's Office for investigation and other appropriate action.
Memorandum of Judge Paul S. Diamond, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, filed September 15, 2026, 40 pages. The quoted excerpt is the contiguous conclusion at page 39. A near-identical sentence appears in the opening summary at page 1. The memorandum disqualifies Krasner and Stiegler, declines to disqualify the District Attorney's Office, and refers all three to the United States Attorney's Office. It names obstruction of justice under 18 U.S.C. 1503 and criminal conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. 371 as the conduct it has in mind. A referral is not a charge.
Memorandum, Johnson v. Nickelson, No. 2:15-cv-04965-PD (E.D. Pa. Sept. 15, 2026)Doc. 173. Opening summary at p. 1; findings at pp. 17, 36-38; conclusion and referral at p. 39.Four prosecutors withdraw their appearances after raising a conflict
Katherine Ernst, Steven Wildberger, David Napiorski and Peter Andrews withdraw their appearances on June 25 and 26. Ernst and Wildberger's filing says the office may have a conflict of interest. These withdrawals precede their later employment departures.
[01]Memorandum, Johnson v. Nickelson, No. 2:15-cv-04965-PD (E.D. Pa. Sept. 15, 2026)
Source excerpt
I have thus reluctantly concluded that Philadelphia's highest law enforcement official and one of his top assistants may have violated the law. In these circumstances, with the issuance of this Memorandum, I refer the DAO, Mr. Krasner, and Stiegler to this District's United States Attorney's Office for investigation and other appropriate action.
Memorandum of Judge Paul S. Diamond, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, filed September 15, 2026, 40 pages. The quoted excerpt is the contiguous conclusion at page 39. A near-identical sentence appears in the opening summary at page 1. The memorandum disqualifies Krasner and Stiegler, declines to disqualify the District Attorney's Office, and refers all three to the United States Attorney's Office. It names obstruction of justice under 18 U.S.C. 1503 and criminal conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. 371 as the conduct it has in mind. A referral is not a charge.
Memorandum, Johnson v. Nickelson, No. 2:15-cv-04965-PD (E.D. Pa. Sept. 15, 2026)Doc. 173. Opening summary at p. 1; findings at pp. 17, 36-38; conclusion and referral at p. 39.
July 2026
Diamond begins a hearing on the office's handling of the case
The court hears testimony from Jaclyn Mason and Matthew Stiegler after deferring a ruling on Johnson's habeas petition. Their testimony takes the full day, and the court schedules further proceedings.
[01]Memorandum, Johnson v. Nickelson, No. 2:15-cv-04965-PD (E.D. Pa. Sept. 15, 2026)
Source excerpt
I have thus reluctantly concluded that Philadelphia's highest law enforcement official and one of his top assistants may have violated the law. In these circumstances, with the issuance of this Memorandum, I refer the DAO, Mr. Krasner, and Stiegler to this District's United States Attorney's Office for investigation and other appropriate action.
Memorandum of Judge Paul S. Diamond, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, filed September 15, 2026, 40 pages. The quoted excerpt is the contiguous conclusion at page 39. A near-identical sentence appears in the opening summary at page 1. The memorandum disqualifies Krasner and Stiegler, declines to disqualify the District Attorney's Office, and refers all three to the United States Attorney's Office. It names obstruction of justice under 18 U.S.C. 1503 and criminal conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. 371 as the conduct it has in mind. A referral is not a charge.
Memorandum, Johnson v. Nickelson, No. 2:15-cv-04965-PD (E.D. Pa. Sept. 15, 2026)Doc. 173. Opening summary at p. 1; findings at pp. 17, 36-38; conclusion and referral at p. 39.Ernst and Wildberger file a notice alleging an office-wide conflict
Ernst and Wildberger formally assert an office-wide conflict in Johnson's case. They argue that Stiegler gave Krasner litigation advice they viewed as inappropriate, and separately that Krasner's instruction to protect the office was incompatible with their ethical duties and the Commonwealth's interests. Their notice does not itself disqualify the office.
[01]Memorandum, Johnson v. Nickelson, No. 2:15-cv-04965-PD (E.D. Pa. Sept. 15, 2026)
Source excerpt
I have thus reluctantly concluded that Philadelphia's highest law enforcement official and one of his top assistants may have violated the law. In these circumstances, with the issuance of this Memorandum, I refer the DAO, Mr. Krasner, and Stiegler to this District's United States Attorney's Office for investigation and other appropriate action.
Memorandum of Judge Paul S. Diamond, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, filed September 15, 2026, 40 pages. The quoted excerpt is the contiguous conclusion at page 39. A near-identical sentence appears in the opening summary at page 1. The memorandum disqualifies Krasner and Stiegler, declines to disqualify the District Attorney's Office, and refers all three to the United States Attorney's Office. It names obstruction of justice under 18 U.S.C. 1503 and criminal conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. 371 as the conduct it has in mind. A referral is not a charge.
Memorandum, Johnson v. Nickelson, No. 2:15-cv-04965-PD (E.D. Pa. Sept. 15, 2026)Doc. 173. Opening summary at p. 1; findings at pp. 17, 36-38; conclusion and referral at p. 39.
September 2026
State attorney general office asks Diamond to disqualify Krasner and his office
After the evidentiary hearings, the Pennsylvania Office of Attorney General submits proposed findings and conclusions urging disqualification of Krasner and the district attorney's office. Johnson takes no position; the district attorney's office opposes disqualification and submits Bruce Green's opinion. Diamond later disqualifies Krasner and Stiegler, but leaves the office in the case.
[01]Memorandum, Johnson v. Nickelson, No. 2:15-cv-04965-PD (E.D. Pa. Sept. 15, 2026)
Source excerpt
I have thus reluctantly concluded that Philadelphia's highest law enforcement official and one of his top assistants may have violated the law. In these circumstances, with the issuance of this Memorandum, I refer the DAO, Mr. Krasner, and Stiegler to this District's United States Attorney's Office for investigation and other appropriate action.
Memorandum of Judge Paul S. Diamond, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, filed September 15, 2026, 40 pages. The quoted excerpt is the contiguous conclusion at page 39. A near-identical sentence appears in the opening summary at page 1. The memorandum disqualifies Krasner and Stiegler, declines to disqualify the District Attorney's Office, and refers all three to the United States Attorney's Office. It names obstruction of justice under 18 U.S.C. 1503 and criminal conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. 371 as the conduct it has in mind. A referral is not a charge.
Memorandum, Johnson v. Nickelson, No. 2:15-cv-04965-PD (E.D. Pa. Sept. 15, 2026)Doc. 173. Opening summary at p. 1; findings at pp. 17, 36-38; conclusion and referral at p. 39.Judge Diamond disqualifies Krasner and Stiegler, refers them and the DAO to the U.S. Attorney
Incident
Judge Diamond disqualified Krasner and Stiegler from the case and declined to disqualify the District Attorney's Office. He referred Krasner, Stiegler, and the office to the United States Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania for investigation and other appropriate action.
[01]Memorandum, Johnson v. Nickelson, No. 2:15-cv-04965-PD (E.D. Pa. Sept. 15, 2026)
Source excerpt
I have thus reluctantly concluded that Philadelphia's highest law enforcement official and one of his top assistants may have violated the law. In these circumstances, with the issuance of this Memorandum, I refer the DAO, Mr. Krasner, and Stiegler to this District's United States Attorney's Office for investigation and other appropriate action.
Memorandum of Judge Paul S. Diamond, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, filed September 15, 2026, 40 pages. The quoted excerpt is the contiguous conclusion at page 39. A near-identical sentence appears in the opening summary at page 1. The memorandum disqualifies Krasner and Stiegler, declines to disqualify the District Attorney's Office, and refers all three to the United States Attorney's Office. It names obstruction of justice under 18 U.S.C. 1503 and criminal conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. 371 as the conduct it has in mind. A referral is not a charge.
Memorandum, Johnson v. Nickelson, No. 2:15-cv-04965-PD (E.D. Pa. Sept. 15, 2026)Doc. 173. Opening summary at p. 1; findings at pp. 17, 36-38; conclusion and referral at p. 39.U.S. Attorney's Office declines to comment on referral
Reaction
The U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania declined to comment on whether it would act on the referral.
[02]Federal judge refers DA Krasner for possible prosecution
WHYY (Philadelphia public radio) report confirming the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania declined to comment on the referral.
Stiegler steps down as supervisor of the Conviction Integrity Unit
Incident
Matthew Stiegler stepped down from his supervisory role over the District Attorney's Office's Conviction Integrity Unit and remained a prosecutor in the unit, the Philadelphia Inquirer reported, first citing anonymous sources.
[03]The Philadelphia Inquirer
Source excerpt
Assistant District Attorney Matthew Stiegler resigned from his position as supervisor of the unit on Thursday, said the sources
Philadelphia Inquirer report, citing anonymous sources, that Stiegler stepped down as supervisor of the Conviction Integrity Unit and would remain a prosecutor in the office. Stiegler and the office's spokesperson did not respond to the Inquirer.
Head of conviction integrity unit in DA’s office steps down after judge points to possible crimes, sources say · The Philadelphia Inquirer[04]The Philadelphia Inquirer
Source excerpt
“You were not trying to get to the truth; you simply wanted to deflect blame from Stiegler.”
Philadelphia Inquirer report on a five-page memo from Katherine Ernst and Steven Wildberger to Krasner, and on Krasner's emailed reply. The Inquirer obtained both documents; neither has been published in full. Krasner said he could not comment publicly; Ernst and Wildberger declined to comment.
Two prosecutors said if Philly DA Larry Krasner doesn’t retract ‘untrue’ court filings, they will quit · The Philadelphia InquirerKrasner asks Judge Diamond to reconsider his findings
Reaction
The District Attorney's Office moved for reconsideration of the September 15 memorandum and order, attaching a declaration in which Krasner called the court's accusations baseless and gave his account of meetings with Law Division supervisors.
[05]Motion for Reconsideration, Johnson v. Nickelson, No. 2:15-cv-04965-PD (E.D. Pa. Sept. 29, 2026)
Source excerpt
When it comes to all of these nominally-serious-but-actually-wafty accusations of criminal conduct, tempered by “coulds” and “mights” and “may haves,” the Court’s analysis rests on nothing of substance.
The District Attorney's Office asks Judge Diamond to reconsider his September 15 memorandum and order. Signed by Krasner and Assistant District Attorney Thomas Gaeta. Read in full from the CourtListener (RECAP) copy.
[06]Declaration of Larry Krasner, Johnson v. Nickelson, No. 2:15-cv-04965-PD (E.D. Pa. Sept. 29, 2026)
Source excerpt
This Court’s oral and written accusations of ADA Matt Stiegler and me (DA Larry Krasner) and its “referral” to the US Department of Justice are virtually unprecedented and are, in fact, baseless. I respectfully submit they must be re-considered.
Nine-page declaration signed by Larry Krasner, filed as Exhibit A to the District Attorney's motion for reconsideration (Doc. 176). It gives Krasner's account of meetings with Law Division supervisors, including Katherine Ernst and Steven Wildberger. Read in full from the CourtListener (RECAP) copy.
[07]The Philadelphia Inquirer
Source excerpt
Krasner took the unusual step of openly criticizing U.S. District Judge Paul S. Diamond
Philadelphia Inquirer report on the District Attorney's motions for reconsideration and recusal and Krasner's declaration.
Philly DA Larry Krasner said the federal judge who accused him of crimes should be removed from the case · The Philadelphia InquirerDistrict Attorney's Office moves to remove Judge Diamond from the case
Reaction
The District Attorney's Office asked Judge Diamond to recuse himself, arguing he had shown bias against the office and Krasner. The judge ordered responses by noon on October 7.
[08]Motion for Recusal, Johnson v. Nickelson, No. 2:15-cv-04965-PD (E.D. Pa. Sept. 30, 2026)
Source excerpt
Second, the vague and baseless accusations, made both in open court on
The District Attorney's Office asks Judge Diamond to recuse himself under 28 U.S.C. § 455(a). Judge Diamond ordered responses by noon on October 7, 2026 (Doc. 178). Read in full from the CourtListener (RECAP) copy.
[07]The Philadelphia Inquirer
Source excerpt
Krasner took the unusual step of openly criticizing U.S. District Judge Paul S. Diamond
Philadelphia Inquirer report on the District Attorney's motions for reconsideration and recusal and Krasner's declaration.
Philly DA Larry Krasner said the federal judge who accused him of crimes should be removed from the case · The Philadelphia Inquirer
October 2026
Ernst and Wildberger tell Krasner they will resign unless he corrects his filings
Reaction
Prosecutors Katherine Ernst and Steven Wildberger sent Krasner a five-page memo, reported by the Philadelphia Inquirer, saying his filings misrepresented their conduct and that they would resign unless he corrected them by the end of October 6. Krasner replied by email that his filings were accurate.
[04]The Philadelphia Inquirer
Source excerpt
“You were not trying to get to the truth; you simply wanted to deflect blame from Stiegler.”
Philadelphia Inquirer report on a five-page memo from Katherine Ernst and Steven Wildberger to Krasner, and on Krasner's emailed reply. The Inquirer obtained both documents; neither has been published in full. Krasner said he could not comment publicly; Ernst and Wildberger declined to comment.
Two prosecutors said if Philly DA Larry Krasner doesn’t retract ‘untrue’ court filings, they will quit · The Philadelphia InquirerDennis Johnson's lawyers oppose the recusal motion
Reaction
Johnson's lawyers told the court they know of no bias that would prevent Judge Diamond from deciding the habeas petition fairly and asked to move on to the merits hearing.
[09]Petitioner's Response to District Attorney's Motion for Recusal, Johnson v. Nickelson, No. 2:15-cv-04965-PD (E.D. Pa. Oct. 5, 2026)
Source excerpt
Mr. Johnson is likewise unaware of any actual or apparent bias that would prevent the Court from fairly adjudicating the merits of this case.
Dennis Johnson's lawyers respond to the District Attorney's recusal motion. They say the motion's allegations are tangential to the merits and ask the court to proceed to the merits hearing. Read in full from the CourtListener (RECAP) copy.
Ernst and Wildberger resign from Krasner's office
Incident
The Philadelphia Inquirer and KYW reported that prosecutors Katherine Ernst and Steven Wildberger resigned after Larry Krasner declined to revise filings they called inaccurate. The Inquirer said their resignations took effect late October 6. The resignations do not resolve the allegations in Judge Paul Diamond's referral.
[10]The Philadelphia Inquirer
Original reporting on Katherine Ernst and Steven Wildberger resigning late October 6 after Krasner declined their requested changes to filings.
Two Philadelphia prosecutors resign after dispute with Krasner · The Philadelphia InquirerParagraphs beginning: Two assistant district attorneys; resignation effective late Tuesday[11]KYW reports Ernst and Wildberger resignations
Separate reporting confirms the resignations. It does not establish that the allegations underlying the court referral were proved.
KYW reports Ernst and Wildberger resignationsOpening paragraphs on the resignations and disputed filingsDiamond denies recusal and reconsideration requests
The judge declines to step aside and refuses to reconsider the order excluding Krasner from the Johnson case. He rejects the filings' arguments; Krasner continues to dispute the underlying findings.
[12]Judge Diamond declines recusal and reconsideration requests
The Inquirer reports the judge's denial of the requests and his reasons. Krasner disputes the underlying findings.
Judge Diamond declines recusal and reconsideration requestsOctober 14 order[13]Judge Diamond Denies Recusal, Doubles Down on Investigation ...
The Legal Intelligencer independently reports the denial of recusal.
Judge Diamond Denies Recusal, Doubles Down on Investigation ...Published report of the October 14 orderReports identify federal grand jury subpoenas to Krasner's office
Source release
The Inquirer and Fox report that federal prosecutors sent subpoenas seeking records concerning the office's handling of the Johnson litigation. The reports do not establish the precise service dates and do not announce criminal charges.
[14]The Justice Department has opened a criminal investigation into Philly DA ...
The Inquirer reports that federal prosecutors sent subpoenas to the office. The exact service dates are not established.
The Justice Department has opened a criminal investigation into Philly DA ...Reporting on federal grand jury subpoenas[15]DOJ sends grand jury subpoenas to Philadelphia DA Krasner's office
Fox reports the grand jury investigation and subpoenas; it does not report an indictment.
DOJ sends grand jury subpoenas to Philadelphia DA Krasner's officeSeparate reporting citing sources familiar with the subpoenas
Claims
Claims separate what was said from what is contested. Follow each source for the original wording and context.
What's disputed
Disputed claim
Krasner and Stiegler pressured Conviction Integrity Unit prosecutors to blame a departed colleague for errors and to present a false narrative to the court about the DAO's internal handling of Dennis Johnson's habeas petition -- conduct that "is tantamount to a prima facie showing" of false statements, false declarations under oath, perjury, obstruction of justice, and conspiracy.
Sources (1)
- Memorandum, Johnson v. Nickelson, No. 2:15-cv-04965-PD (E.D. Pa. Sept. 15, 2026)Doc. 173. Opening summary at p. 1; findings at pp. 17, 36-38; conclusion and referral at p. 39.
Response record
Responses
Choose one response filter, or select All responses to see the full record.
23 responses. First 6 shown initially. Newest first.
Martin PreibWriter and retired Chicago police officer, writing a signed column Before this statement
Preib compares the reported Krasner inquiry with allegations involving former Cook County State's Attorney Kim Foxx.
"While the Chicago media refuses to address the blatant parallels between top prosecutors in Philly and Chicago, federal investigators should not refuse to do so. Restoring the criminal justice system, in particular holding police killers accountable, is a central theme of the Trump administration. The feds must do their job not just in Philly, but Chicago as well."
CondemnedCase context: Did Larry Krasner Pressure Staff to Mislead a Federal Judge About a Murder-Conviction Appeal?
Full statement and sources
Preib accuses Chicago media of ignoring parallels with Philadelphia and urges federal investigators to act in both cities.
After the statement
Krasner denies wrongdoing. The column does not establish that he committed a crime.
Finally, a Prosecutor Faces Criminal Probe in Wrongful Conviction CaseConclusion; version updated October 23Philly DA Larry Krasner said the federal investigation into his office ...Krasner's statements in Thursday's WHYY interviewWhy this label?
The matter under scrutiny is alleged misconduct by Krasner's office. Preib supports federal investigation and describes the conduct critically.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Larry KrasnerPhiladelphia district attorney, interviewed on WHYY's Studio 2Directly involvedBefore this statement
The interview follows reports of federal grand jury subpoenas to his office.
"Not only did we do nothing criminal, we did nothing that was deliberately wrong,"
DeniedCase context: Did Larry Krasner Pressure Staff to Mislead a Federal Judge About a Murder-Conviction Appeal?
Full statement and sources
Krasner denies wrongdoing and says he is not worried. He characterizes the inquiry as political retaliation; the report says there is no indication Trump or the attorney general directed it.
After the statement
Krasner's remarks concern a federal grand jury investigation of his office's handling of the Johnson case.
The DOJ investigation into Philadelphia DA Larry KrasnerStudio 2 episode, 48:12Philly DA Larry Krasner said the federal investigation into his office ...Krasner's statements in Thursday's WHYY interviewWhy this label?
The matter under scrutiny is alleged misconduct by Krasner and his office in the Johnson litigation. He explicitly denies criminal and deliberate wrongdoing.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
- Larry KrasnerDistrict Attorney of PhiladelphiaDirectly involved
Before this statement
From the District Attorney's Office's October 9, 2026 reply in support of its motion asking Judge Diamond to recuse, signed by Krasner and Assistant District Attorney Thomas Gaeta. A footnote names the supervisory assistants as Katherine Ernst, Steven Wildberger, David Napiorski and Peter Andrews. Ernst and Wildberger's resignations had taken effect late on October 6, after Krasner declined to change how his filings described them.
"DA Krasner and his supervisory assistants acted with integrity in seeking to withdraw the erroneous brief, correct the errors, and change position to oppose a new trial"
Challenged the characterizationResponding to: Krasner and Stiegler pressured Conviction Integrity Unit prosecutors to blame a departed colleague for errors and to present a false narrative to the court about the DAO's internal handling of Dennis Johnson's habeas petition -- conduct that "is tantamount to a prima facie showing" of false statements, false declarations under oath, perjury, obstruction of justice, and conspiracy.
Full statement and sources
In an October 9 court filing supporting his motion to remove Judge Diamond from the case, Krasner said he and his supervisory assistants, whom the filing names as including Katherine Ernst and Steven Wildberger, acted with integrity in seeking to withdraw the office's erroneous brief.
After the statement
The sentence continues with Krasner's description of the court's finding: that considering a review of Jaclyn Mason's other work for errors warrants a criminal investigation. In an email reply to Ernst and Wildberger's memo, Krasner had accused them of insubordination.
Reply in Support of Motion for Recusal, Johnson v. Nickelson, No. 2:15-cv-04965-PD (E.D. Pa. Oct. 9, 2026)Doc. 181, pp. 1-2 and n.1Two Philadelphia prosecutors resign after dispute with Krasner · The Philadelphia InquirerParagraphs beginning: Two assistant district attorneys; resignation effective late TuesdayWhy this label?
Relative to the conduct under scrutiny, Krasner disputes the court's account by saying he and his supervisors acted with integrity in correcting the erroneous brief. He contests how his conduct is described and does not argue that pressuring staff would be justified, so the label is challenges characterization.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Martina WhitePennsylvania State Representative (R), 170th DistrictBefore this statement
Posted on October 7, 2026, the day the Philadelphia Inquirer reported that Katherine Ernst and Steven Wildberger had resigned from the District Attorney's Office, saying Krasner had misrepresented their actions in his court filings.
"More turmoil because of Larry Krasner. Now prosecutors are resigning because Krasner always puts his radical agenda before prosecuting criminals. Prosecutors shouldn't resign because of a radical DA... Krasner should resign."
CondemnedCase context: Did Larry Krasner Pressure Staff to Mislead a Federal Judge About a Murder-Conviction Appeal?
Full statement and sources
After two prosecutors resigned from Krasner's office, state Rep. Martina White said the resignations showed Krasner puts "his radical agenda before prosecuting criminals" and said he should resign.
After the statement
The Inquirer reported that Krasner has vehemently denied the accusations, declined to change his filings and, in an email reply to Ernst and Wildberger's memo, accused them of insubordination.
Martina White on X: "More turmoil because of Larry Krasner" (Oct. 7, 2026) · Martina WhitePost, October 7, 2026, 6:02 p.m. ETTwo Philadelphia prosecutors resign after dispute with Krasner · The Philadelphia InquirerParagraphs beginning: Two assistant district attorneys; resignation effective late TuesdayWhy this label?
Relative to Krasner's conduct in the Johnson matter and its fallout in his office, White criticizes Krasner directly and calls for his resignation. The label is condemns.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of PennsylvaniaFederal prosecutor's office that received Judge Paul S. Diamond's referral, in an emailed reply from its public affairs officerBefore this statement
Dispute Index asked the office on October 6, 2026 whether it had opened an investigation or reached a decision on the referral, and whether it could say anything on the record about how it is handling it. The question followed a September 29 court declaration in which Krasner wrote that there was reason to believe the Justice Department would act on the referral.
"The U.S. Attorney's Office declines to comment."
Explicitly stayed outCase context: Did Larry Krasner Pressure Staff to Mislead a Federal Judge About a Murder-Conviction Appeal?
Full statement and sources
The U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania declined to comment when asked whether it had opened an investigation or reached a decision on Judge Paul S. Diamond's September 15 referral of District Attorney Larry Krasner, Matthew Stiegler and the District Attorney's Office.
After the statement
The case records that the office also declined to comment on September 16, the day after the referral.
Emailed reply from the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania to Dispute Index on Judge Diamond's referral of Larry Krasner · U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of PennsylvaniaEmailed reply from Carrie Adamowski, public affairs officer, U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, October 7, 2026 (UTC).Why this label?
The reference point is the question whether Krasner pressured staff to mislead a federal judge in Dennis Johnson's habeas case, which Judge Paul S. Diamond referred to this office. Asked whether it had opened an investigation or reached a decision on the referral, the office declined to comment, so we used Explicitly stayed out. The closest competing label is a finding that this is not a position event at all; it loses because the office was asked directly about its handling of the referral and declined to answer.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Steven WildbergerAssistant district attorney, Philadelphia District Attorney's Office (resigned October 6, 2026; statement co-signed with Katherine Ernst) Before this statement
According to the Philadelphia Inquirer on October 7, Ernst and Wildberger said that because Krasner had declined to address their concerns about his court filings, they could no longer work for him. The report attributes the words to both and does not say when they were written.
"sought to discredit us in the eyes of the public we represent"
CondemnedResponding to: Krasner and Stiegler pressured Conviction Integrity Unit prosecutors to blame a departed colleague for errors and to present a false narrative to the court about the DAO's internal handling of Dennis Johnson's habeas petition -- conduct that "is tantamount to a prima facie showing" of false statements, false declarations under oath, perjury, obstruction of justice, and conspiracy.
Full statement and sources
Wildberger and Katherine Ernst said that because Krasner had declined to address their concerns about his court filings, they could no longer work for him, saying he had sought to discredit them. Both resigned late on Tuesday, October 6.
After the statement
Their resignations took effect late on October 6. Krasner said in an email reply to their memo that his recollections were accurate and his conclusions were drawn "in good faith," and he accused them of insubordination.
Two Philadelphia prosecutors resign after dispute with Krasner · The Philadelphia InquirerParagraphs beginning: Two assistant district attorneys; resignation effective late TuesdayWhy this label?
Wildberger says Krasner tried to discredit him and Ernst after they disputed how his filings described them. That criticizes Krasner's conduct toward the staff involved in the matter the case examines, so the label is condemns.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Show fewer responses
Katherine ErnstAssistant district attorney, Philadelphia District Attorney's Office (resigned October 6, 2026; message co-signed with Steven Wildberger) Before this statement
Quoted by the Philadelphia Inquirer on October 7 from what Ernst and Wildberger wrote to Krasner. The report describes a letter they sent him on Monday, October 5, asking him to correct his court filings, and attributes the words to both without saying which message they come from.
"Your actions make it impossible for us to continue to represent the Commonwealth"
CondemnedResponding to: Krasner and Stiegler pressured Conviction Integrity Unit prosecutors to blame a departed colleague for errors and to present a false narrative to the court about the DAO's internal handling of Dennis Johnson's habeas petition -- conduct that "is tantamount to a prima facie showing" of false statements, false declarations under oath, perjury, obstruction of justice, and conspiracy.
Full statement and sources
In a message co-signed with Steven Wildberger, Ernst told Krasner that his actions made it impossible for them to keep representing the Commonwealth. Both resigned from his office late on Tuesday, October 6.
After the statement
Their resignations took effect late on October 6, and each declined to comment further the next day. Krasner declined to change his filings, saying in an email reply to their memo that his recollections were accurate, and accused them of insubordination.
Two Philadelphia prosecutors resign after dispute with Krasner · The Philadelphia InquirerParagraphs beginning: Two assistant district attorneys; resignation effective late TuesdayWhy this label?
Ernst says Krasner's own conduct, including how his court filings described her and Wildberger, left them unable to keep working for the office. That criticizes Krasner's conduct in the matter the case examines, so the label is condemns.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
- Larry KrasnerDistrict Attorney of PhiladelphiaDirectly involved
Before this statement
Krasner emailed this reply to Ernst, Wildberger and several others after receiving their memo. Publicly, he said he could not comment because the underlying case is pending.
"I have shown great restraint in not taking action within the office against your insubordination, your legally incorrect and unexamined positions, your factually misleading representations, and the damage they have caused your co-workers and the office"
Challenged the characterizationResponding to: Krasner and Stiegler pressured Conviction Integrity Unit prosecutors to blame a departed colleague for errors and to present a false narrative to the court about the DAO's internal handling of Dennis Johnson's habeas petition -- conduct that "is tantamount to a prima facie showing" of false statements, false declarations under oath, perjury, obstruction of justice, and conspiracy.
Full statement and sources
In an email reply to Ernst and Wildberger, obtained by the Philadelphia Inquirer, Krasner said his court filings were accurate and accused the two prosecutors of insubordination and misleading representations.
After the statement
He added: "Despite my restraint, you now falsely claim that your decision to quit the office is somehow a termination for reasons that are also obviously self-serving."
Two prosecutors said if Philly DA Larry Krasner doesn’t retract ‘untrue’ court filings, they will quit · The Philadelphia InquirerWhy this label?
Krasner rejects the prosecutors' account of his conduct as misleading and stands by his filings. He disputes the description of events rather than defending the alleged conduct as acceptable, so the label is challenges characterization.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Steven WildbergerAssistant district attorney, Philadelphia District Attorney's Office (memo co-signed with Katherine Ernst) Before this statement
According to the Philadelphia Inquirer, the memo closes by accusing Krasner of calling his prosecutors "human shields" and of saying "judges can't get to you because you don't sign any filings."
"But the ADAs of the Philadelphia District Attorney’s Office are not your shields; we are people"
CondemnedResponding to: Krasner and Stiegler pressured Conviction Integrity Unit prosecutors to blame a departed colleague for errors and to present a false narrative to the court about the DAO's internal handling of Dennis Johnson's habeas petition -- conduct that "is tantamount to a prima facie showing" of false statements, false declarations under oath, perjury, obstruction of justice, and conspiracy.
Full statement and sources
In a memo to Krasner co-signed with Katherine Ernst, Wildberger said Krasner had called the prosecutors who work for him "human shields" and rejected that role.
After the statement
The memo says that if Krasner did not correct the misrepresentations in his filings by Tuesday, "you will have constructively terminated us."
Two prosecutors said if Philly DA Larry Krasner doesn’t retract ‘untrue’ court filings, they will quit · The Philadelphia InquirerWhy this label?
The memo accuses Krasner of treating subordinate prosecutors as shields who sign filings so judges cannot reach him, which criticizes the pressure on staff that the case examines. The label is condemns.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Katherine ErnstAssistant district attorney, Philadelphia District Attorney's Office (memo co-signed with Steven Wildberger) Before this statement
Krasner's September 29 declaration said Stiegler's proposed "sentinel review" of Mason's other cases could get to the truth, and that Law Division supervisors may have opposed it out of fear. Ernst and Wildberger's memo, quoted by the Philadelphia Inquirer, disputes that account. It precedes this sentence with "We heard your words, and we saw your demeanor."
"You were not trying to get to the truth; you simply wanted to deflect blame from Stiegler."
CondemnedResponding to: Krasner and Stiegler pressured Conviction Integrity Unit prosecutors to blame a departed colleague for errors and to present a false narrative to the court about the DAO's internal handling of Dennis Johnson's habeas petition -- conduct that "is tantamount to a prima facie showing" of false statements, false declarations under oath, perjury, obstruction of justice, and conspiracy.
Full statement and sources
In a memo to Krasner co-signed with Steven Wildberger, Ernst said Krasner's interest in reviewing Jaclyn Mason's other cases was an effort to deflect blame from Stiegler, not to find the truth.
After the statement
The memo says Krasner's filings contained misrepresentations about both prosecutors and that they would resign unless he corrected them by the end of Tuesday, October 6.
Two prosecutors said if Philly DA Larry Krasner doesn’t retract ‘untrue’ court filings, they will quit · The Philadelphia InquirerWhy this label?
Ernst says Krasner sought to shift blame from Stiegler onto Mason, which asserts the conduct the case examines. That is a direct criticism of it, so the label is condemns.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
- Larry KrasnerDistrict Attorney of PhiladelphiaDirectly involved
Before this statement
Filed on September 29, 2026 as Exhibit A to the District Attorney's Office's motion asking Judge Diamond to reconsider his September 15 memorandum and order.
"This Court’s oral and written accusations of ADA Matt Stiegler and me (DA Larry Krasner) and its “referral” to the US Department of Justice are virtually unprecedented and are, in fact, baseless. I respectfully submit they must be re-considered."
Challenged the characterizationResponding to: Krasner and Stiegler pressured Conviction Integrity Unit prosecutors to blame a departed colleague for errors and to present a false narrative to the court about the DAO's internal handling of Dennis Johnson's habeas petition -- conduct that "is tantamount to a prima facie showing" of false statements, false declarations under oath, perjury, obstruction of justice, and conspiracy.
Full statement and sources
In a declaration filed with his office's motion for reconsideration, Krasner said Judge Diamond's accusations against him and Stiegler and the referral to the Justice Department are baseless.
After the statement
The declaration goes on to say the court's findings "twist the truth to the point of breaking" and gives Krasner's account of his meetings with Law Division supervisors, including Katherine Ernst and Steven Wildberger.
Declaration of Larry Krasner, Johnson v. Nickelson, No. 2:15-cv-04965-PD (E.D. Pa. Sept. 29, 2026)Doc. 176-1, pp. 1, 7-8Philly DA Larry Krasner said the federal judge who accused him of crimes should be removed from the case · The Philadelphia InquirerWhy this label?
Krasner rejects the judge's account of his and Stiegler's conduct as baseless and says the findings twist the truth. He disputes that the conduct happened as described rather than defending it as justified, so the label is challenges characterization, consistent with his September 15 response.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
- Larry KrasnerPhiladelphia district attorney, in a Tuesday statement reported September 24Directly involved
Before this statement
The article says Krasner framed Diamond's legal conclusions as accusations and invoked Letitia James, James Comey and other targets of federal investigations.
"Or ask dozens of innocent people whose exonerations this DA’s office supported what they say about accusations."
Challenged the characterizationCase context: Did Larry Krasner Pressure Staff to Mislead a Federal Judge About a Murder-Conviction Appeal?
Full statement and sources
Krasner answers the referral by comparing accusations against him with accusations against people whose convictions his office helped overturn. He also points to other people targeted by the Trump Justice Department.
After the statement
The same report says Krasner had earlier disagreed with Diamond's conclusions and declined detailed comment while the matter was pending.
Philly DA Larry Krasner faces an uncertain political future as Democrats weigh what could come nextAnna Orso original Inquirer report, syndicated by Tribune Content Agency; Krasner's Tuesday statementWhy this label?
The reference point is characterizing the alleged pressure and handling of the Johnson appeal as possible criminal misconduct. Krasner challenges the weight and framing of accusations without directly rebutting each factual allegation.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Martin PreibWriter and retired Chicago police officer, in his signed September 18column Before this statement
The column discusses Diamond's referral and allegations made by former prosecutor Jaclyn Mason.
"The call for the feds to criminally investigate Krasner’s administration is a crucial step in taking back the justice system from radicals"
CondemnedCase context: Did Larry Krasner Pressure Staff to Mislead a Federal Judge About a Murder-Conviction Appeal?
Full statement and sources
Preib welcomes the referral concerning Krasner as a major step against what he describes as a radical prosecutorial movement. He argues that comparable scrutiny should reach Chicago, while treating the Philadelphia referral as a starting point.
After the statement
Preib then asks where a federal investigation might lead. His comparisons with Chicago remain his argument, not a finding in the Johnson proceeding.
A Diamond in the RoughFinal two paragraphs of the signed September 18columnWhy this label?
The reference point is alleged misconduct in Krasner's office's handling of conviction appeals. Preib expressly criticizes the administration and welcomes a criminal investigation; he does not claim a criminal conviction has occurred.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
The Philadelphia InquirerEditorial board of The Philadelphia Inquirer, in an unsigned institutional editorialBefore this statement
Judge Paul Diamond had disqualified Krasner and Matthew Stiegler from the Dennis Johnson habeas case on September 15 and referred them and the District Attorney's Office to the U.S. Attorney's Office. Krasner said he would appeal.
"Then Krasner needs to look in the mirror and determine if he can continue to run the district attorney's office under the giant cloud he has created."
CondemnedCase context: Did Larry Krasner Pressure Staff to Mislead a Federal Judge About a Murder-Conviction Appeal?
Full statement and sources
The Philadelphia Inquirer's editorial board responded to Judge Diamond's findings by asking whether Larry Krasner should still lead the District Attorney's Office. It quoted the judge's conclusion that "potential wrongdoing abounds," placed the ruling in what it called a pattern in the office's post-conviction work, and said Krasner must determine whether he can continue to run the office under the cloud he had created. It did not call for his resignation.
After the statement
The editorial noted that one supervisor in the office had been disbarred and another suspended for repeatedly lying in federal court. No elected Democrats had publicly defended Krasner at the time of publication.
Should Larry Krasner still lead the Philadelphia District Attorney's Office? | Editorial · The Philadelphia InquirerUnsigned editorial by The Philadelphia Inquirer Editorial Board, September 18, 2026.Why this label?
The board attributes the resulting crisis to Krasner himself, describing it as a cloud "he has created," and questions his fitness to continue, which is criticism of the conduct under scrutiny. The closest competing label is “Mixed or conditional”, because the editorial is framed as a series of questions and expressly declines to demand resignation. That loses because declining to prescribe a remedy is not the same as withholding an evaluation; the possessive attribution of the cloud to Krasner states the board's judgment of responsibility.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Charles Fain LehmanSenior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, writing a signed article in City JournalBefore this statement
The article, adapted from City Journal's Substack, appeared two days after Judge Diamond referred Krasner, Stiegler and the District Attorney's Office to the U.S. Attorney's Office.
"The criminal referral would be the next logical step for an office that seems committed to misleading the courts in the name of its theory of justice."
CondemnedCase context: Did Larry Krasner Pressure Staff to Mislead a Federal Judge About a Murder-Conviction Appeal?
Full statement and sources
Manhattan Institute senior fellow Charles Fain Lehman wrote in City Journal that Krasner has already been reprimanded by another federal judge and seen his conviction-integrity unit constrained by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, and that a criminal referral would be the next logical step for an office that seems committed to misleading the courts in the name of its theory of justice.
After the statement
The article goes on to list other progressive prosecutors who have drawn federal scrutiny, including Marilyn Mosby, Kim Gardner and Rachael Rollins.
Progressive Prosecutors Have a Crime Problem All Their OwnParagraphs beginning "It's not clear if the U.S. Attorney's office will take up the request" through "theory of justice"Why this label?
Lehman describes the referral as the next step for an office he says seems committed to misleading the courts, which is his own evaluation of the conduct at issue. The closest competing label is “Mixed or conditional”, because he notes it is unclear whether the U.S. Attorney will act. That loses because the uncertainty concerns the prosecutors' decision, not his assessment of Krasner's conduct.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Cully StimsonSenior legal fellow at The Heritage Foundation, writing a signed column for The Daily SignalBefore this statement
The column followed Judge Diamond's 40-page opinion disqualifying Krasner and Stiegler from the Johnson case and referring them to the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.
"It will now be up to the United States attorney for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania to decide whether to conduct an investigation. Given Krasner’s track record and the judge’s findings of fact and conclusions of law, it should be an easy call."
CondemnedCase context: Did Larry Krasner Pressure Staff to Mislead a Federal Judge About a Murder-Conviction Appeal?
Full statement and sources
Heritage Foundation legal fellow Cully Stimson wrote that Judge Diamond's findings showed Krasner wanted the DAO to submit a false narrative to the court, and that, given Krasner's track record and those findings, the U.S. attorney's decision whether to investigate "should be an easy call."
After the statement
The column says the decision whether to conduct an investigation now rests with the U.S. attorney.
Federal Judge Refers Philly DA Krasner to DOJ for ProsecutionSigned column; final section beginning "The opinion's gravamen is Krasner's response" through the closing paragraphWhy this label?
Stimson recounts Diamond's findings that Krasner wanted a false narrative presented, adopts them, and argues that they and Krasner's record make an investigation an easy decision. The closest competing label is “Challenged the characterization”, because much of the column restates the opinion. That loses because he adds his own evaluation that the U.S. attorney should investigate and that the decision is easy.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Broad + LibertyEditorial board of Broad + Liberty, in an unsigned institutional editorialBefore this statement
Diamond's ruling had been issued two days earlier. Krasner's Republican critics had renewed long-standing objections to him, while no elected Democrats had publicly defended him.
"If even half of it is true, it is misconduct worthy of disbarment and removal from office."
CondemnedCase context: Did Larry Krasner Pressure Staff to Mislead a Federal Judge About a Murder-Conviction Appeal?
Full statement and sources
The editorial board of Broad + Liberty argued that Judge Diamond's findings, if even half true, would amount to misconduct warranting Krasner's disbarment and removal from office. It presented the referral as the culmination of what it called a train of abuses, asserted that Krasner had refused to adequately prosecute crime while working to release convicted felons, and called on Democratic legislators to set partisanship aside in responding.
After the statement
The Philadelphia Inquirer's editorial board published its own assessment the following day, stopping short of calling for his removal.
From the Editors: Can Democrats rise above partisanship to reject Krasner? · Broad + LibertyUnsigned editorial by the Broad + Liberty editorial board, September 17, 2026.Why this label?
The editorial treats that conduct as disqualifying and refers to "Krasner's misdeeds" as established. The closest competing label is “Mixed or conditional”, and it is a genuine contender: the sentence on disbarment is expressly conditioned on the allegations being at least half true. That loses because the condition attaches to the remedy rather than to the board's evaluation; elsewhere the editorial asserts his misdeeds as fact and treats the pattern as settled, so the conclusion does not turn on an unresolved condition.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Jonathan TurleyLaw professor at George Washington University Law School and legal commentator, writing on his personal siteBefore this statement
Diamond had referred Krasner, Stiegler and the District Attorney's Office to the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on September 15. Krasner said he respectfully and vigorously disagreed and would appeal.
"For a man who ran on the slogan "F around and find out," Larry Krasner may soon find out."
CondemnedCase context: Did Larry Krasner Pressure Staff to Mislead a Federal Judge About a Murder-Conviction Appeal?
Full statement and sources
Law professor Jonathan Turley wrote that Judge Diamond had reluctantly concluded Krasner and his assistant may have violated the law, summarised the findings on a pressure campaign against staff who raised concerns and on potential perjury, obstruction, false statements and conspiracy, and argued that Krasner had exhausted the patience of courts and the loyalty of his own staff. He framed the referral as the consequence of Krasner using the office to advance ideology.
After the statement
The referral does not constitute charges; legal experts quoted elsewhere noted that any federal investigation could take months or years and that no clearly equivalent precedent came to mind.
"F— Around and Find Out": Krasner Referred to U.S. Attorney for Criminal Investigation · Jonathan TurleyPost on Jonathan Turley's personal site, September 17, 2026.Why this label?
Turley accepts the judge's account and criticises Krasner's conduct and its motive. The closest competing label is “Challenged the characterization”, because much of the post restates the court's findings rather than arguing independently. That loses because Turley adds his own evaluation, that Krasner has exhausted judicial patience and staff loyalty and used the office ideologically, which goes beyond summarising the ruling.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Robert Saleem HolbrookExecutive director, Straight Ahead Before this statement
Said to Philadelphia Inquirer reporters after Judge Diamond's September 15, 2026 referral became public.
"This is unfortunately a continuation of the right's assault on DA Krasner and the policies that he's implemented. This is a judge using an internal conflict in the office to further the objective of removing Krasner from office."
Challenged the characterizationCase context: Did Larry Krasner Pressure Staff to Mislead a Federal Judge About a Murder-Conviction Appeal?
Full statement and sources
Robert Saleem Holbrook said the referral is a politically motivated continuation of efforts to remove Krasner.
After the statement
Holbrook heads both Straight Ahead and the Abolitionist Law Center.
Why this label?
Holbrook does not dispute the specific facts found by Judge Diamond, but reframes the referral itself as a politically motivated continuation of efforts to remove Krasner rather than a neutral legal action -- disputing the characterization of the referral's motivation rather than defending the underlying conduct or denying it outright.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
- Martina WhitePennsylvania State Representative (R), 170th District
Before this statement
Said to Philadelphia Inquirer reporters after Judge Diamond's September 15, 2026 memorandum and referral became public.
"Philadelphia needs a reliable DA, not a defendant-in-waiting."
CondemnedCase context: Did Larry Krasner Pressure Staff to Mislead a Federal Judge About a Murder-Conviction Appeal?
Full statement and sources
State Rep. Martina White said the referral shows Philadelphia needs a different district attorney.
After the statement
White previously led a 2022 effort in the state legislature to impeach Krasner.
Why this label?
White directly argues Krasner is unfit to continue as DA in light of the judge's findings, an express denunciation of his fitness for office in response to the referral.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
- Larry KrasnerDistrict Attorney of PhiladelphiaDirectly involved
Before this statement
Given to the Philadelphia Inquirer after Judge Diamond issued his September 15, 2026 memorandum and order disqualifying Krasner and Stiegler and referring them and the DAO to the U.S. Attorney's Office.
"I respectfully and vigorously disagree with the court's findings of fact and conclusions of law. I look forward to appealing to the higher court as soon as the law allows. This remains a pending matter, which limits for now my and my office's ability to respond in the media."
Challenged the characterizationResponding to: Krasner and Stiegler pressured Conviction Integrity Unit prosecutors to blame a departed colleague for errors and to present a false narrative to the court about the DAO's internal handling of Dennis Johnson's habeas petition -- conduct that "is tantamount to a prima facie showing" of false statements, false declarations under oath, perjury, obstruction of justice, and conspiracy.
Full statement and sources
Larry Krasner said he disagrees with Judge Diamond's findings and plans to appeal.
After the statement
Krasner said the pending status of the matter limited his and his office's ability to respond further in the media.
Why this label?
Krasner disputes Judge Diamond's findings of fact and legal conclusions wholesale, without admitting the underlying conduct occurred -- disputing the characterization of his and Stiegler's conduct rather than defending it as justified or excusable, or conceding any part of it.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Bruce A. GreenLouis Stein Chair of Law at Fordham University School of Law, giving an expert opinion at the request of the Philadelphia District Attorney's Office Before this statement
Filed on September 8, 2026 as an exhibit to the District Attorney's Office's proposed findings on disqualification, a week before Judge Diamond ruled. Green wrote that the office asked for his opinion, that he was not paid for it, and that he relied on a statement of facts the office provided.
"For the following reasons, my firm opinion, based on the facts provided for my consideration, is that neither District Attorney Krasner nor the District Attorney’s Office in its entirety has a conflict of interest that requires their recusal in this action."
Challenged the characterizationCase context: Did Larry Krasner Pressure Staff to Mislead a Federal Judge About a Murder-Conviction Appeal?
Full statement and sources
In a declaration the Philadelphia District Attorney's Office filed in the Dennis Johnson case, Fordham law professor Bruce A. Green gave his opinion that neither Krasner nor the office had a conflict of interest requiring their recusal.
After the statement
Green added that even if Krasner were personally accused of misconduct, it would not follow that he must disqualify himself. In his September 15 memorandum, Judge Diamond disqualified Krasner on conflict grounds, called Green's opinion "a disorganized mess and largely useless" and wrote that Green had "ignored critical facts that bear directly on the conflicts question."
Declaration of Bruce A. Green, Johnson v. Nickelson, No. 2:15-cv-04965-PD (E.D. Pa. Sept. 8, 2026)Doc. 169-1, pp. 1-8 (declaration, paras. 11-19)Memorandum, Johnson v. Nickelson, No. 2:15-cv-04965-PD (E.D. Pa. Sept. 15, 2026)Doc. 173. Opening summary at p. 1; findings at pp. 17, 36-38; conclusion and referral at p. 39.Why this label?
This case covers Judge Diamond's findings about Krasner's conduct in the Johnson matter, including his finding that Krasner had a personal-interest conflict that required disqualification. Green disputes that legal reading: he says Krasner has no conflict requiring recusal. He does not address whether Krasner pressured staff, so denies does not fit, and he does not argue that any such pressure was justified. The label is challenges characterization.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Paul DaviesInquirer opinion writer and former court reporter, in a signed August 31 column Before this statement
Before the quoted assessment, Davies reports that Krasner's office had called the prosecutors ill-informed in an earlier filing. Davies says he attended the hearing.
"The three prosecutors provided alarming testimony detailing how Krasner avoided using his official office email and threatened them."
CondemnedCase context: Did Larry Krasner Pressure Staff to Mislead a Federal Judge About a Murder-Conviction Appeal?
Full statement and sources
Davies criticizes the conduct described by three prosecutors at the August 27 hearing. He says their testimony depicted an office that seemed more focused on shielding itself than pursuing justice.
After the statement
Davies describes the prosecutors' allegations about email practices and threats. His assessment predates the later criminal referral.
The day Larry Krasner's office was put on trial by his own prosecutorsPaul Davies signed column, section on testimony about email practices and threatsWhy this label?
The reference point is alleged pressure on staff and efforts to mislead the court about the Johnson appeal. Davies uses his own critical evaluation of the testimony and the office's conduct.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Sources
(32)
Original text
Memorandum, Johnson v. Nickelson, No. 2:15-cv-04965-PD (E.D. Pa. Sept. 15, 2026)
Relevant passage: Doc. 173. Opening summary at p. 1; findings at pp. 17, 36-38; conclusion and referral at p. 39.
Excerpt
"I have thus reluctantly concluded that Philadelphia's highest law enforcement official and one of his top assistants may have violated the law. In these circumstances, with the issuance of this Memorandum, I refer the DAO, Mr. Krasner, and Stiegler to this District's United States Attorney's Office for investigation and other appropriate action."
About this source
Memorandum of Judge Paul S. Diamond, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, filed September 15, 2026, 40 pages. The quoted excerpt is the contiguous conclusion at page 39. A near-identical sentence appears in the opening summary at page 1. The memorandum disqualifies Krasner and Stiegler, declines to disqualify the District Attorney's Office, and refers all three to the United States Attorney's Office. It names obstruction of justice under 18 U.S.C. 1503 and criminal conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. 371 as the conduct it has in mind. A referral is not a charge.
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Philly DA Larry Krasner faces an uncertain political future as Democrats weigh what could come next
Relevant passage: Anna Orso original Inquirer report, syndicated by Tribune Content Agency; Krasner's Tuesday statement
About this source
The complete authorized syndication identifies the Inquirer and its author. The statement was issued Tuesday,September 22, and reported September 24. The criminal referral remains an allegation, not a charge.
- Published
- Accessed
Analysis
A Diamond in the Rough
Relevant passage: Final two paragraphs of the signed September 18column
About this source
Preib welcomes the referral concerning Krasner and argues that related scrutiny should reach Chicago. Only his case-specific assessment of the Krasner referral is recorded here.
- Published
- Accessed
Analysis
The day Larry Krasner's office was put on trial by his own prosecutors
Relevant passage: Paul Davies signed column, section on testimony about email practices and threats
About this source
Davies describes the August 27hearing he attended and gives his own critical assessment. Witness allegations are attributed, not a criminal conviction or an independent judicial determination.
- Published
- Accessed
Analysis
Finally, a Prosecutor Faces Criminal Probe in Wrongful Conviction Case
Relevant passage: Conclusion; version updated October 23
About this source
Preib welcomes federal scrutiny of Krasner and urges comparable scrutiny in Chicago. This is a signed opinion column.
- Author
- Martin Preib
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Philly DA Larry Krasner said the federal investigation into his office ...
Relevant passage: Krasner's statements in Thursday's WHYY interview
About this source
The syndicated Philadelphia Inquirer report quotes Krasner's October 22 interview and distinguishes his allegations from established facts.
- Author
- The Philadelphia Inquirer
- Published
- Accessed
Interview
The DOJ investigation into Philadelphia DA Larry Krasner
Relevant passage: Studio 2 episode, 48:12
About this source
WHYY lists the October 22 interview and provides the full original recording.
- Author
- WHYY Studio 2
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
DOJ sends grand jury subpoenas to Philadelphia DA Krasner's office
Relevant passage: Separate reporting citing sources familiar with the subpoenas
About this source
Fox reports the grand jury investigation and subpoenas; it does not report an indictment.
- Author
- Fox News
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
The Justice Department has opened a criminal investigation into Philly DA ...
Relevant passage: Reporting on federal grand jury subpoenas
About this source
The Inquirer reports that federal prosecutors sent subpoenas to the office. The exact service dates are not established.
- Author
- The Philadelphia Inquirer
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Judge Diamond Denies Recusal, Doubles Down on Investigation ...
Relevant passage: Published report of the October 14 order
About this source
The Legal Intelligencer independently reports the denial of recusal.
- Author
- Riley Brennan
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Judge Diamond declines recusal and reconsideration requests
Relevant passage: October 14 order
About this source
The Inquirer reports the judge's denial of the requests and his reasons. Krasner disputes the underlying findings.
- Author
- The Philadelphia Inquirer
- Published
- Accessed
Emailed statement
Emailed reply from the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania to Dispute Index on Judge Diamond's referral of Larry Krasner
Emailed reply from the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania to Dispute Index on Judge Diamond's referral of Larry Krasner
Good morning, Ben -- The U.S. Attorney's Office declines to comment. Best, Carrie
Full email
Good morning, Ben -- The U.S. Attorney's Office declines to comment. Best, Carrie
Relevant passage: Emailed reply from Carrie Adamowski, public affairs officer, U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, October 7, 2026 (UTC).
Excerpt
"The U.S. Attorney's Office declines to comment."
About this source
Emailed reply from the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania to Dispute Index questions about whether it had opened an investigation or reached a decision on Judge Paul S. Diamond's September 15 referral of District Attorney Larry Krasner, Matthew Stiegler and the District Attorney's Office. The office declined to comment.
- Author
- Carrie Adamowski, Public Affairs Officer
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Reply in Support of Motion for Recusal, Johnson v. Nickelson, No. 2:15-cv-04965-PD (E.D. Pa. Oct. 9, 2026)
Relevant passage: Doc. 181, pp. 1-2 and n.1
Excerpt
"Although DA Krasner and his supervisory assistants acted with integrity in seeking to withdraw the erroneous brief, correct the errors, and change position to oppose a new trial,"
About this source
Reply in support of the District Attorney's Office's motion asking Judge Paul S. Diamond to recuse, filed October 9, 2026 and signed by District Attorney Lawrence S. Krasner and Assistant District Attorney Thomas Gaeta. Footnote 1 names the supervisory assistants as Katherine Ernst, Steven Wildberger, David Napiorski and Peter Andrews. Read in full from the CourtListener (RECAP) copy.
- Author
- Lawrence S. Krasner and Thomas Gaeta
- Published
- Accessed
Original post
Martina White on X: "More turmoil because of Larry Krasner" (Oct. 7, 2026)
Excerpt
"More turmoil because of Larry Krasner. Now prosecutors are resigning because Krasner always puts his radical agenda before prosecuting criminals. Prosecutors shouldn't resign because of a radical DA... Krasner should resign."
About this source
Posted on Martina White's verified X account (@VoteMartinaPA) on October 7, 2026, the day the Philadelphia Inquirer reported that Katherine Ernst and Steven Wildberger had resigned from the Philadelphia District Attorney's Office.
- Author
- Martina White
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Declaration of Bruce A. Green, Johnson v. Nickelson, No. 2:15-cv-04965-PD (E.D. Pa. Sept. 8, 2026)
Relevant passage: Doc. 169-1, pp. 1-8 (declaration, paras. 11-19)
Excerpt
"For the following reasons, my firm opinion, based on the facts provided for my consideration, is that neither District Attorney Krasner nor the District Attorney’s Office in its entirety has a conflict of interest that requires their recusal in this action."
About this source
Eight-page declaration signed by Bruce A. Green on September 7, 2026 and filed on September 8, 2026 as Exhibit A to the Philadelphia District Attorney's Office's proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law (Doc. 169) on whether Krasner or the office should be disqualified. Green states that the office asked for his opinion, that he was not paid for it, and that he relied on a statement of facts the office provided. His curriculum vitae and that statement of facts are attached. Read in full from the CourtListener (RECAP) copy.
- Author
- Bruce A. Green
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
KYW reports Ernst and Wildberger resignations
Relevant passage: Opening paragraphs on the resignations and disputed filings
About this source
Separate reporting confirms the resignations. It does not establish that the allegations underlying the court referral were proved.
- Author
- Kristen Johanson
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Two Philadelphia prosecutors resign after dispute with Krasner
Relevant passage: Paragraphs beginning: Two assistant district attorneys; resignation effective late Tuesday
About this source
Original reporting on Katherine Ernst and Steven Wildberger resigning late October 6 after Krasner declined their requested changes to filings.
- Author
- Chris Palmer
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Head of conviction integrity unit in DA’s office steps down after judge points to possible crimes, sources say
Excerpt
"Assistant District Attorney Matthew Stiegler resigned from his position as supervisor of the unit on Thursday, said the sources"
About this source
Philadelphia Inquirer report, citing anonymous sources, that Stiegler stepped down as supervisor of the Conviction Integrity Unit and would remain a prosecutor in the office. Stiegler and the office's spokesperson did not respond to the Inquirer.
- Author
- Chris Palmer and Ellie Rushing
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Philly DA Larry Krasner said the federal judge who accused him of crimes should be removed from the case
Excerpt
"Krasner took the unusual step of openly criticizing U.S. District Judge Paul S. Diamond"
About this source
Philadelphia Inquirer report on the District Attorney's motions for reconsideration and recusal and Krasner's declaration.
- Author
- Chris Palmer
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Two prosecutors said if Philly DA Larry Krasner doesn’t retract ‘untrue’ court filings, they will quit
Excerpt
"“You were not trying to get to the truth; you simply wanted to deflect blame from Stiegler.”"
About this source
Philadelphia Inquirer report on a five-page memo from Katherine Ernst and Steven Wildberger to Krasner, and on Krasner's emailed reply. The Inquirer obtained both documents; neither has been published in full. Krasner said he could not comment publicly; Ernst and Wildberger declined to comment.
- Author
- Chris Palmer and Ellie Rushing
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Petitioner's Response to District Attorney's Motion for Recusal, Johnson v. Nickelson, No. 2:15-cv-04965-PD (E.D. Pa. Oct. 5, 2026)
Relevant passage: Doc. 179, pp. 1-4
Excerpt
"Mr. Johnson is likewise unaware of any actual or apparent bias that would prevent the Court from fairly adjudicating the merits of this case."
About this source
Dennis Johnson's lawyers respond to the District Attorney's recusal motion. They say the motion's allegations are tangential to the merits and ask the court to proceed to the merits hearing. Read in full from the CourtListener (RECAP) copy.
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Motion for Recusal, Johnson v. Nickelson, No. 2:15-cv-04965-PD (E.D. Pa. Sept. 30, 2026)
Relevant passage: Doc. 177, 22 pp.
Excerpt
"Second, the vague and baseless accusations, made both in open court on"
About this source
The District Attorney's Office asks Judge Diamond to recuse himself under 28 U.S.C. § 455(a). Judge Diamond ordered responses by noon on October 7, 2026 (Doc. 178). Read in full from the CourtListener (RECAP) copy.
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Motion for Reconsideration, Johnson v. Nickelson, No. 2:15-cv-04965-PD (E.D. Pa. Sept. 29, 2026)
Relevant passage: Doc. 176, 23 pp.
Excerpt
"When it comes to all of these nominally-serious-but-actually-wafty accusations of criminal conduct, tempered by “coulds” and “mights” and “may haves,” the Court’s analysis rests on nothing of substance."
About this source
The District Attorney's Office asks Judge Diamond to reconsider his September 15 memorandum and order. Signed by Krasner and Assistant District Attorney Thomas Gaeta. Read in full from the CourtListener (RECAP) copy.
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Declaration of Larry Krasner, Johnson v. Nickelson, No. 2:15-cv-04965-PD (E.D. Pa. Sept. 29, 2026)
Relevant passage: Doc. 176-1, pp. 1, 7-8
Excerpt
"This Court’s oral and written accusations of ADA Matt Stiegler and me (DA Larry Krasner) and its “referral” to the US Department of Justice are virtually unprecedented and are, in fact, baseless. I respectfully submit they must be re-considered."
About this source
Nine-page declaration signed by Larry Krasner, filed as Exhibit A to the District Attorney's motion for reconsideration (Doc. 176). It gives Krasner's account of meetings with Law Division supervisors, including Katherine Ernst and Steven Wildberger. Read in full from the CourtListener (RECAP) copy.
- Published
- Accessed
Analysis
Progressive Prosecutors Have a Crime Problem All Their Own
Relevant passage: Paragraphs beginning "It's not clear if the U.S. Attorney's office will take up the request" through "theory of justice"
Excerpt
"The criminal referral would be the next logical step for an office that seems committed to misleading the courts in the name of its theory of justice."
About this source
Signed opinion article in City Journal, adapted from the magazine's Substack. It summarizes Judge Diamond's referral and compares Krasner with other progressive prosecutors who have faced federal scrutiny.
- Author
- Charles Fain Lehman
- Published
- Accessed
Analysis
Federal Judge Refers Philly DA Krasner to DOJ for Prosecution
Relevant passage: Signed column; final section beginning "The opinion's gravamen is Krasner's response" through the closing paragraph
Excerpt
"Given Krasner’s track record and the judge’s findings of fact and conclusions of law, it should be an easy call."
About this source
Signed opinion column by a Heritage Foundation legal fellow, published in The Daily Signal. It summarizes Judge Diamond's opinion and argues that the U.S. Attorney should investigate.
- Author
- Cully Stimson
- Published
- Accessed
Analysis
"F— Around and Find Out": Krasner Referred to U.S. Attorney for Criminal Investigation
Relevant passage: Post on Jonathan Turley's personal site, September 17, 2026.
Excerpt
"For a man who ran on the slogan "F around and find out," Larry Krasner may soon find out."
About this source
Commentary from a law professor who writes frequently on prosecutorial conduct. Turley notes that Judge Diamond reached his conclusion reluctantly, summarises the findings on the pressure campaign against staff and the potential perjury, obstruction, false statements and conspiracy, and argues Krasner has exhausted the patience of courts and the loyalty of his staff. The title plays on a slogan from Krasner's own campaign.
- Author
- Jonathan Turley
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
From the Editors: Can Democrats rise above partisanship to reject Krasner?
Relevant passage: Unsigned editorial by the Broad + Liberty editorial board, September 17, 2026.
Excerpt
"If even half of it is true, it is misconduct worthy of disbarment and removal from office."
About this source
A Philadelphia-region opinion outlet's editorial calling on Democratic legislators to act against Krasner. It presents Diamond's referral as the culmination of what it calls a train of abuses and argues the matter should not divide along party lines. Its conclusion about disbarment and removal is expressly conditioned on the allegations being at least half true.
- Author
- The Editors
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Should Larry Krasner still lead the Philadelphia District Attorney's Office? | Editorial
Relevant passage: Unsigned editorial by The Philadelphia Inquirer Editorial Board, September 18, 2026.
Excerpt
"Then Krasner needs to look in the mirror and determine if he can continue to run the district attorney's office under the giant cloud he has created."
About this source
The editorial board of the city's largest newspaper responding to Judge Diamond's findings. It quotes the judge's conclusion that "potential wrongdoing abounds" and situates the ruling within what it describes as a pattern in the office's post-conviction work, noting that one supervisor was disbarred and another suspended for repeatedly lying in federal court. It stops short of calling for Krasner's resignation, instead asking whether he can regain the trust of the public and of prosecutors in his own office.
- Author
- The Inquirer Editorial Board
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Philly DA Larry Krasner faces legal and political uncertainty after a judge said he may have committed crimes
About this source
Philadelphia Inquirer report on political and legal reaction to Judge Diamond's September 15, 2026 referral, quoting State Rep. Martina White, Robert Saleem Holbrook (Straight Ahead), Sergio Cea (Reclaim Philadelphia), and law professors Lauren Ouziel and Michael Levy.
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Federal judge refers DA Krasner for possible prosecution
About this source
WHYY (Philadelphia public radio) report confirming the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania declined to comment on the referral.
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
A federal judge said he believes DA Larry Krasner may have broken the law and is referring him to prosecutors
Excerpt
"I respectfully and vigorously disagree with the court's findings of fact and conclusions of law. I look forward to appealing to the higher court as soon as the law allows. This remains a pending matter, which limits for now my and my office's ability to respond in the media."
About this source
Philadelphia Inquirer report on Judge Diamond's memorandum, quoting Krasner's on-record response.
- Published
- Accessed
Corrections
(1)
Corrections address errors in our reporting or labels. When a speaker changes their position, we add a separate statement and link it to the earlier one.
Reporting correction
Correction to: Did Larry Krasner Pressure Staff to Mislead a Federal Judge About a Murder-Conviction Appeal?
- Previous language
- Case summary, as published: "A federal judge found Philadelphia DA Larry Krasner and a top aide may have pressured staff to mislead the court over a 2022 murder-case concession, referring both to federal prosecutors. Krasner disputes the findings and plans to appeal." Timeline entry, as published: "Judge Diamond disqualifies Krasner and Stiegler, refers DAO to DOJ" Source excerpt, as published: "I have thus reluctantly concluded that Philadelphia's highest law enforcement official and one of his top assistants may have violated the law... I am compelled, with the issuance of this Memorandum, to refer the DAO, Mr. Krasner, and Stiegler to this District's United States Attorney's Office for investigation and other appropriate action."
- Corrected language
- The case summary now states that the judge disqualified Krasner and a top aide, declined to disqualify the District Attorney's Office, and referred all three to federal prosecutors. The timeline entry now names the United States Attorney's Office and records that the office was not disqualified. The source excerpt is now a single contiguous passage from page 39.
Three imprecisions, found on reading the memorandum itself. The case summary said the judge referred "both" Krasner and a top aide, when the memorandum refers Krasner, Matthew Stiegler, and the District Attorney's Office, and it omitted that the judge expressly declined to disqualify the office. The timeline entry said the referral went to "DOJ" and named only the office. The source excerpt joined the conclusion at page 39 to a fragment of the opening summary at page 1 with an ellipsis, presenting non-contiguous text in reverse document order. No finding of the court is changed.
This corrects our account of what happened.
Memorandum of Judge Paul S. Diamond, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, filed September 15, 2026, 40 pages. The quoted excerpt is the contiguous conclusion at page 39. A near-identical sentence appears in the opening summary at page 1. The memorandum disqualifies Krasner and Stiegler, declines to disqualify the District Attorney's Office, and refers all three to the United States Attorney's Office. It names obstruction of justice under 18 U.S.C. 1503 and criminal conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. 371 as the conduct it has in mind. A referral is not a charge.
Share or embed this case
The embed keeps its attribution link to The Dispute Index. Credit the image to The Dispute Index and link to the case page.
Cite this record
- Publisher
- The Dispute Index
- Title
- Did Larry Krasner Pressure Staff to Mislead a Federal Judge About a Murder-Conviction Appeal?
- First published
- Last updated
- Permalink
- https://disputeindex.com/cases/larry-krasner-pressure-staff-mislead-judge-murder-appeal
The Dispute Index. "Did Larry Krasner Pressure Staff to Mislead a Federal Judge About a Murder-Conviction Appeal?". First published: 2026-09-17. Last updated: 2026-10-12. https://disputeindex.com/cases/larry-krasner-pressure-staff-mislead-judge-murder-appeal