If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov. - . • . • • -. ; . o • .: . ~, ~'~'~<,.~: .'~• '~ -'-'; ~.g-~, ~'•° :~. ~•~. ,~ :--';'~'"' k" :'-~.C~;',"~.~.:;.*--~;:':.,,:~. °~:::o ,:C~':,.;.; ' .~<';~'~,~','-: .~x:~;-',;'•.-_.~::-:-•.~:,.. - .::..~•~ :: ~":, ': ~ ;~;~.h ~ .... ,.. I'-.." : ~',-:'.V:.-<' ",, .,~" ...... ..,.> .... ........... ........... ,...--:.~,~, :,:,:~ct~'~,~',,::'~-:::,~t::~,.~;:~ . • :~•; i : ~ ::X":~:'t'~!:. : ~ " ~f~ ~z-:-:'~'~ 4: ~.::~,$~.!~-:.}o,-~:~?~,~t.:#, ,,_~::~: ':; ": - ..... ::" %':"":;'~:":'~'~'~[1:.::.:~-.2~ ..... " " ,:-- •~::, "-~- ...... *~-,~"'~ -" .-~,[.-"::~,!-k:-~i., ,:--::~•, -~:~:,::~.>~,'~%Z::~-~','.-.:~:;-:'. '-< "= .... ,..::. : :-.~ :4- [;-:., . ,[4 • .':- .~..:~/:...°:.L:q,.-: -:;~-.-." -" .'.., • , . _ •: ".",,..":&:.~7."•:¢;,':t: ;g';': "4:..',:~::c..~.b.'..'%~ ,:-7, ' ,':~"L~(,), • "':ILL:::,I 'i:d'.'~ "~'," ".°- :! ~..r~ ..,,~:~v.- ~- :. :..--~.-.: "::~:" ..... "7,. -" ':: ,,~. < .4..'.-i~'.; ' ;, t. -...;::. : :.:? ... -:... :~ :;...~..-.-,.:[.- ...-..,~ ...... ;..., ..... • ,..,~,:..:.... ,..: ....... .., . :.,, ..... • ,..:. : .-:,....'!:.). :,- -~, , ,:: ....... ,.- : ....... .: ,,.~.: . , , ., ",,--":. ,::.,,/ : .:. -:..:~', .("i,'~;,':,., ':,: :: ,-'.:: ::i.:: ~:':.,[i: /t. i-' -. • ' ..- .: :' ".- "'. - : ,.-. - _ .~ "~. : '..'.'::-- .; ,.:-'.4.,..-','.. ": ••2,'., '." "' ", 7." -, "'-: ~ "-- -~-. ,,: ".~ ."': '..-" • " . :,, ~',':'.o:'~":~"',: ".-:".."~ ": .7": <,~'..%"::.:%1,.'~.~ :. ". :.,"-;.': '": ..... "..','i~,:- . ,: ~,"..'.'.",:':v: ~ L-~.'--, "::~-:.'. ...... "- " " :. ":, .- :7• t • ',_,'C '--:"'.:.. ~ " • .t .. ~e ., ,;~-Z',: ,:'..~." ~: . ' ...... >" ":" '" '-,: ..... 4"" :4, "" i:.. ", :~'C'~:,:-.:~ ~.; "',-. '-" "- • : . : ." L ~ , , '-. - '."": '- ". ":.'. "'~ ...... :,':'" .- ' ' " " " "i,- :" "~ "~:J ' ',~'. :'~:,~'~7:~. - ..... ~" .~.X' ; " '" '~:""':< : ~':-~','~"Y: ~* "-'~' ':~ ~ ~° - : ::.• :'~v :.•!"..~.t '•," •.-, '-~ '~ :-.~..~:-.: ::.Z: ~ ~:?.-...:i.:-:~~:: ....... Eva1~ on. o ~ !',:::!:,• ::--~ •-. '.~: : :; ~:~ •: '--!~.~,.:::-;~ ~-:!~ :?~ i.•::::•': '~"'":. ;: • - ': i.• -.. -&:. :' ..,.,:,::.:..:.:%~.~"~b.~ S~e~a:l. ~-~sec~U~, ~ Office• ;. • .::, ...~"~'~%-.-,~i~-'O.t~-:~,-:.:.•-/Z .. • : " :-~" <•-• •.': " • of, ~iladelmhi& " "• :•: -~. ?'~ " •!-': - ; " ' . ..- . ;....: .., ,'-. .:t. , - ":.. : -.. ,.: ...' , ~..:. ::,.. - , • '-..'..:-,~:,.. '...~. ".. "'.~ "..':~,..-~.~', -~£..~." "- ,', :-.. - - - " ~' ' --. " : • --':~-:-:- -."~. ": ". '~ .-: i "~':"~ -~'". ::' 2:' , .'-- , "i~ ...... :--':,--v~v~:,.',:..:..... " " " ': :- -- -., ::,'...~'- , ~'~. : .. "" '.: , ' .~.. "--'." ," ..-. " ;-4." " "' - :- -- *"~.-.''.'-" ,''-~;-" ~'- '" ~ ,-; • ,"','/'. .... '', -" "' . ' "." .-,." ::,,::.." . ..' ." ', ':" .. ": "-: .e-?,'-- • -'~"* - "~: "--, ;" ,'~" ".~; , "" '~" 4" "'L.e..~',, ~.,."., 7" :::p- " ? "*.'t. • - "~÷'~ • ". , .' -'7. ~4,'.".: ' ." " ,'" ~-•.- . ~ .-.:.~p..:,.~:~..~ ~:... ~... ;r~; , .:~.,:, :,~'~. ;.~, : ..... &:,~':.,'~%': ' ... :>;~. ,-,.'~';'~-,-'. .'.'. : ° ,.'~:,,. ." .... ":, " .. ".-'." .I - '~'."'. ; -" >',:;.-'~-;~,:5f.~'," " ". "5 [ .' -" ' .-' '~;', " .: . ":~,"- '- ".'"~".~,~'¢.~"-~'-~'~.' " ~',' • ...: • -:..' " ...... _~: . ,.v .'.~ .... .- ,, , , °.: .' . , ,. , ,., .:; , ,'., • .. .,".."..., :, .. , . • - . , , - . , ,- .. .. , , ' ¢', ,.- ." p - -... ". :.: t. ,'~,_ 2 • .- " . - " ,, "~ ' ". , ;., . ..,,,, ,~ . , ....... .' ~ .... • " "- " ~:' " : ,-- ' , '" t ". - ,~'~ " ".:'" ":'U-~" ;" .,; .... ' ,~-'~' . ' -}'-" - " -. : "" -':-'" .... " • • "'. .... .-'..'~."_hv','" : ~" '-': ..... " t "'~ " " "? " ~" --'~" " ~' "3' *~:',,~': ..... ; ;;,,- ,',~Z" " ''.. ,., -"t", ".! .:~ ': ~1 , " : :': • - .".'.-.~", - -'-W. ~'- "~'-'. .'.:..''F. ~ ....... ~*.' "."~;-';~'."~-"-.~,:'.;'-' "*. ¢,'' 'oh>" : .;:." ,~:..':.-:-~.--~'o',:." ' ,_ -'' ' , ~, • - . ~t. v ~ -. ;.-'¢ ". -~- : . " - ". ....... :-. "- " " t -, .... ." " .'. :. ° .... ° • ; . ' ": • . ".. ~ " • " ' '~.' ~ " . " ~ • .. ~i', ~" ~ " .~ ":-'- ' ' :, . " ':'' ". ' • • ' . : . " " '." .. ' " " ~ . *-., .,:" :" " ' • ' . :' ~: r ".:-" . ,." • tZ ,. "! . : . • . ., _ , z~.~. 3 "t -. , ~-; . ": . -, D Evaluation of The Special Prosecutor's Office of Philadelphia Samuel Dash Principal Investigator Charles H. Rogovin Deputy Principal Investigator February. I0, 1977 Prepared with funds provided by LEAA throuch the C-~vernor's Justice Com_~.ission of ~=~---,~-,=~-= and the Gene-=1 Assembly of Pennsv~,,=~ ~,- Table of Contents Preface i Introduction 1 The Appointment of Walter Phillips 3 The January 1974 Grand Jury 16 Recruitment, Organization and Investigation 25 Structure of the Office 35 Relationship with OSP Staff Lawyers 36 Strategy, Tactics and Intelligence 38 Investigative Procedure 45 OSP Cases 47 Relationship with Courts 86 Relationship with Other Law Enforcement Agencies 89 1. The District Attorney of Philadelphia 89 2. The Philadelphia Police Department 92 3. The U.S. Attorney's Office 94 Relationship with the Philadelphia Bar 96 Relationship with the Philadelphia Community !00 Relationship with the Press !03 Relationship with the Governor and Attorney General 105 OSP Funding (Tables) i!0 Loss of Body Bug !14 The Erosion of State Support lib Destruction of the OSP 127 Shapp v. S!can ~36 Ccnc!usion !39 Recommendations !I 142 Appendices: i. Evaluation Proposal and Contract 2. Example of Court Delays 3. Record of OSP Prosecutions 4. Relevant Cases O~ Preface This evaluation of the Office of the Special Prosecutor of Philadelphia was performed under a contract with the Attorney General of Pennsylvania in his dual roles as Chairman of the Governor's Justice Commission and as head of the Pennsylvania Department of Justice• A copy of the contract and the letter proposal on which it was based are attached as anappendix to this report• At the outset it should be s~a_ed~ ~ that Attorney General Robert P. Kane fully cooperated with the evaluation and provided all of the assistance he had promised and that was requested of h~m. His staff was equally helpful in promptly and supportive!y responding to the project's needs. Special mention must also be made of the unqualified cooperation received by the evaluation project from former Special Prosecutor Walter Phillips and his staff and from his successor, Bernard Siegel and his sta_~.~= Walter Phillips pu~ aside everything he was doing to launch a new law practice in order to make himself completely available for interviews. The evaluation's heaviest demands for records and information occurred at a most inconvenient time for the Office of the Special Prosecutor. Mr Siegel and his -~-~= • ~=_~ were engaged in a desperate fight for survival while t.-ying to maintain their investigations end prosecutions. They were short-handed and overworked. Yet they good na~r___y~.~ ~! allowed the evaluation staff to occupy their offices .and co through their files and records =~ t -= convenience of the evaiuators. One further acknowledgement is necessary. The supervising judge of the then sitting November 1975 Special Investigating Grand Jury, Philadelphia Common Pleas Court Judge Myrna Marshall, gave invaluable support and assistance to the evaluation. Most Lmportan~ to the project was the order she signed allowing the staff to inspect grand jury records and transcripts. The evaluation was performed by a small staff of six, not all of whom were employed on a full-time basis, on a limited budget of approximately $56,000 and during a period of five months. In addition to the principal investigator, Samuel Dash, the project staff consisted of the deputy principal investigator, Charles H. Rogovin; the administrative assistant, Sara G. Dash; and ~hree evaluation ~=-~~== assistants, Jeffrey Blattner, Michael Lubline and Mitche!l M~ller. Each of the staff assistants had previous investigative exp.erience. The staff shared their findings with and received advice from five expert consultants: Martin Danziqer, ; former Director of the National Institute of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice of LE~_~; Ronald Goldstock, Executive Director of the Cornel! Institute on Organized Crime; Henry Ruth, for~.er ~atergate Special Prosecutor; Edward H. Steir, Deputy Director of the Division of Criminal Justice of the Department of Law and Public Safety of New Jersey; and Charles Work, former Assistant U.S. Attorney in charge of District of ~ol'~--~-ubia affairs and former Deputy Administrator of the Law Enforcement Assistance Adm..inistration of the U. S. Department of Justice. Although the staff received invaluable advice from these ex~-ert. consui.-nts,4. _ th_': evaluation-- project's star -~ is sole-~v -- responsible :--__~ t~e.- !ancua--. ~ , findings and recommendations of this report. The methodology employed in the evaluation is described in the appended copy of the informal letter proposal. As the proposal indicates, the peculiar nature of a special prosecutor's office does not permit an evaluation or measurement of ~he,work of this office either in quantifiable terms, or against a larger quantifiable Context. For this reason statistical or social science methodology was not attempted. Instead, this evaluation depended solely on the professional judgments of experienced experts based on their review of relevant records and interviews of relevant persons. The findings presented and inferences drawn in this report have, therefore, not been copied from computer print-outs or verified by any other method of quantitative analysis. They do not spring from evidence tested by an adversary process (although an