Determining when a case is strong enough to prosecute and when a confidential informant might be too compromised to take the witness stand are decisions typically made behind closed doors. However, in the wake of state Attorney General Kathleen Kane’s decision to shutter a public corruption investigation, these nuts-and-bolts choices have gained a high profile.
Lawyers are now debating whether close scrutiny into decision-making and deal-cutting that typically take place behind the scenes will affect the jury pool or the prosecution of corruption cases in general in Pennsylvania.
