A district attorney bears the weight of not only enforcing the law but also understanding how, where and when to apply it.
The DA sets the tone for other prosecutors — and often, by extension, police agencies — about the way crimes are charged and how the accused are treated.
Sometimes, it is the simple math of resources. Is it worth the public’s money to spend a million dollars on a misdemeanor with a probation sentence? Sometimes, it is the more complicated calculus of justice. Is it fair to the community to let this crime be prosecuted while ignoring that one?
It is a job that falls to the DA because the people made that choice. This is who they believe best reflects the public’s values.
That makes it curious that Allegheny County District Attorney Stephen A. Zappala Jr.’s recent moves regarding some laws have been questioned by those outside his office as well as from within.
On Aug. 15, Zappala announced he would be doing virtual video briefings. That started Aug. 16 with a very produced update on the killing of 18-month-old De’Avry Thomas in May 2022. As an update, it was strange because there was no new information. The perpetrators had been convicted in June.
The majority of the video had nothing to with the toddler. It did, however, have references to political opponents, which is definitely arguable and an improper use of the office. That is noteworthy because Zappala is mired in a fight for his seventh term in office, having lost the Democratic primary but surviving to the general election because of Republican write-in votes.
In the video briefing, Zappala potentially damaged the cases against Heze’kiah Nixon and Tylajae Allen, victims in the Thomas shooting who also are charged in an August 2022 North Side homicide case.
As of Thursday, the video is no longer on the DA’s website. That speaks to knowledge that it was a mistake.
At the same time, Chief Trial Deputy District Attorney William Petulla has filed a motion for a gag order in the Nixon and Allen cases, saying the video was taken down “in the interest of justice.” What is the purpose of the gag order? According to Petulla, it’s to keep Nixon’s attorney from talking about the video and its potential prejudice of his client.
In this instance, it seems like a gag order would be good. Unfortunately, it should probably have been issued before Zappala’s video was posted. Asking for it now smacks of kicking a dog and being mad that it growled.
The DA is the last person who should need an explanation of the foundation of criminal law: Defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty.
