The Justice Department has launched a criminal investigation into the office of Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner. According to sources familiar with the matter, federal prosecutors recently issued grand jury subpoenas to the office to examine whether officials engaged in the obstruction of justice during proceedings before federal judges.
What sparked the DOJ criminal probe?
The federal inquiry was triggered by a referral from U.S. District Judge Paul S. Diamond. Last month, Diamond suggested that federal authorities should investigate Krasner and his senior assistant, Matthew Stiegler, for possible conspiracy, perjury, or obstruction of justice.
The investigation centers on a legal challenge regarding a 2009 murder conviction. During those proceedings, Judge Diamond alleged that Krasner and Stiegler tried to influence prosecutors to provide a misleading account to the court. While the judge removed both men from that specific case, he did not disqualify the entire District Attorney's office.
Context of the underlying case
The conflict arose from a post-conviction petition filed by Dennis Johnson, who was convicted of killing Kenyatta Smith. In 2022, the DA's office claimed Johnson deserved relief due to ineffective legal counsel. However, internal friction emerged when staff members suggested the case be handed to the Pennsylvania Attorney General due to potential conflicts involving Stiegler.
Court documents indicate that Krasner disagreed with this move, stating he needed to maintain involvement to "protect the office." This internal disagreement and the subsequent handling of the matter led to the judge's decision to refer the situation to federal prosecutors.
What to watch for next
While the issuance of grand jury subpoenas marks a significant escalation, it does not mean that Krasner or his staff will face formal charges. The subpoenas are currently focused on gathering evidence, including various emails and documents linked to the murder case.
Krasner has denied any wrongdoing and has criticized the judge's conclusions, labeling the courtroom environment a "circus." He also noted that because grand jury investigations are private by law, he cannot provide detailed responses. As the probe continues, the focus will remain on whether the collected evidence justifies a criminal indictment.
