Philadelphia's notorious DA Larry Krasner is facing serious allegations from two prosecutors who say he refused to hand over an appeal to the Office of the Attorney General (OAG) after prosecutors noticed a serious conflict of interest. Krasner allegedly told the attorneys to "protect the office" and threatened consequences for anyone who revealed internal conflicts.
Two Philly prosecutors accused DA Larry Krasner of telling them to ‘protect the office’ in a controversial appellate case https://t.co/EVoNMwtRxD
— The Philadelphia Inquirer (@PhillyInquirer) July 20, 2026
This is a stunning filing by two supervisors at @philadao. First, some context. Katherine Ernst was the Philly DAO’s lead counsel in the Lavar Brown matter, where @SupremeCtofPA found that @DA_LarryKrasner’s office had erroneously conceded relief to a 2x murderer. 1/5 pic.twitter.com/e6TFbjJ2Vb
— Christopher Lynett (@ChrisLynettEsq) July 21, 2026
In early June 2026, Assistant District Attorneys Katherine Ernst and Steven J. Wildberger and other attorneys filed to be removed from the Dennis Johnson case, a man who is seeking a reversal of his murder conviction. Later that month, Ernst and Wildberger personally removed themselves as respondents in the case after observing a "conflict of interest," but had said they had thought it was being resolved.
On Friday, the court held a hearing to review the withdrawal motions and conflict of interest speculations. During that hearing, another assistant DA from Krasner's office questioned witnesses, showing the District Attorney's Office (DAO) had not removed itself from the case. The hearing also featured a testimony from a former prosecutor on the case, Jaclyn Mason, who testified that DAO supervisor Matthew Stiegler, routinely held meetings with Johnson's prosecutors to discuss how to "secure his release," without reviewing key evidence. She also alleged that supervisors told her to lie to a federal judge to avoid drawing further scrutiny to the DAO for its handling of murder appeals. The notice of conflict was filed just yesterday in response to the hearing.
Recommended
Ernst and Wildberger were prompted to file when it became "apparent that the conflict they perceive to be burdening the DAO has not been remedied," the filing said. Part of their concern was that Stiegler, who had approved Mason's faulty filing to overturn Johnson's conviction, was still advising on the case. Ernst and Wildberger viewed the continued involvement as a clear conflict and attempt by Stiegler to clear his name rather than act impartially.
Throughout the report, they detail the pressures they faced when repeatedly pleading with the DAO to refer the case, to which Krasner directed them to "protect the office." Ernst and Wildberger viewed that response as a violation of their "ethical obligations and the interests of the Commonwealth." They wrote again to request a referral, and said that "DA Krasner stated that there would be ‘consequences’ for anyone who notified the court of the conflict issues.”
Krasner said that he "had a lot to say" on Monday's filing, but that he must wait until the case is no longer pending in federal court. “The DA’s Office will be responding to the recent filing in the ethically appropriate way—on the record, because it is generally viewed as inappropriate and possibly unethical to comment during a pending hearing," Krasner said to the Philadelphia Inquirer.
The fallout follows a series of scandals that trail Krasner's office, particularly surrounding conviction reversals. His Conviction Integrity Unit (CIU) repeatedly reverses convictions and drops felony cases, and the recent filing gives a glimpse into the potential internal collusions and shortfalls of the unit.
Editor’s Note: Help us continue to report the truth about corrupt politicians.
Join Townhall VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member