Mr. DA: Explain yourself

Allegheny County District Attorney Stephen Zappala has some explaining to do. And he’d better do it quickly because the vultures are circling.

In a breathtakingly stupid and arrogant move, the county’s top legal prosecutor emailed a memo to his staffers telling them not to make plea offers to a particular Black attorney who had decried racism in the criminal justice system. The attorney had criticized in a recent open court proceeding the DA’s office as well as other local justice officials. He claimed there was racial bias in plea offers from the DA’s office.

The smart and reasonable response to attorney Milton Raiford, who is beating the drum of anti-racism with public statements at all court proceedings he attends, would have been a sincere fact-finding analysis of the attorney’s claims. Do Black defendants get a raw deal from the DA’s office as compared to white defendants? What do the historical facts actually show?

Instead, Mr. Zappala reacted in what only could be described as anger if not outright retaliation.

The DA said there would be no plea bargaining — a staple of every court jurisdiction in the country — with Mr. Raiford. A notable caveat: Exceptions would be allowed with approval of the DA’s “front office,” which includes the DA, his first assistant and his chief trial deputy. That caveat is important because it forestalls (at least in theory) an outright ban on plea agreements, a fact that Mr. Zappala should be bending over backward to reinforce publicly.

Without backpedaling, Mr. Zappala’s wrath spills from Mr. Raiford onto his clients — citizens who are cloaked in the presumption of innocence until and unless they are deemed guilty in a court of law. Thus, these clients become victims as their rights to due process are undermined by the conflict between their attorney and their prosecutor. It isn’t right.

The public response has been earsplitting.

The legal community (the local bar association, pundits, even a county judge), elected officials (the mayor and a bunch of state representatives), and the public at large (advocates for minorities and the disenfranchised) have let loose their outrage. Some are calling for Mr. Zappala’s forced removal from office in lieu of his voluntary resignation.

Mr. Zappala’s response has been oddly anemic. He issued a statement that included a transcript of Mr. Raiford’s courtroom speech (which amounted at times to a ramble) and a copy of the internal memo in question.

It’s not enough. The DA must fully explain himself in a public forum that invites hard questions. Otherwise, Mr. Zappala will be stained as a retaliatory, entitled and petulant prosecutor who is unworthy of the office he holds.