On July 12, 2018, Philadelphia real estate developer Sean Schellenger was stabbed to death by Michael White in Philadelphia’s Rittenhouse Square. The dead man was white, and his assailant was black.

Immediately following the killing, White was charged with first degree murder. But over time, Larry Krasner, Philadelphia’s progressive district attorney, incrementally reduced the charge to voluntary manslaughter. And, following a listless courtroom presentation by Krasner’s office, a jury acquitted the defendant on the manslaughter charge, but found him guilty of tampering with evidence (based on his attempt to dispose of the bloody knife).

Needless to say, the case and Krasner’s handling of it generated a great deal of public controversy and comment.

In 2020, Tigre Hill, a noted Black West Philadelphia filmmaker, asked to meet with me to discuss the case. I knew of his work and his reputation for honesty and integrity and readily agreed to help him in any way I could.

He explained to me his plan to make a documentary about the killing and its aftermath. I found him to be very thoughtful, intelligent and determined to present the facts fairly and impartially.

As he later told Philadelphia Magazine, “This was a very, very highly charged case involving race, class, and criminal justice reform, all mired in the politics of today. It’s a microcosm of what has been going on with politics in the nation. You have two sides that very strongly advocated their position.”

The friends and family of Schellenger, a prosperous young white real estate developer ( profiled here in 2017 by Philadelphia Magazine) said his death was murder, and that Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner let White off easy by downgrading the main charge from first-degree murder to third-degree murder, and then to voluntary manslaughter. 

On the other hand, the supporters of White, a young Black man who was doing bicycle deliveries for Uber Eats at the time of the encounter, claim that Schellenger was the aggressor, and that White acted in self-defense when he stabbed Schellenger in the back.

Hill was aware of my background in prosecuting police brutality cases as well as homicides and crimes of violence. I believe he also knew of the op-eds I had written for the Philadelphia Inquirer questioning Krasner’s handling of the case as well as his office’s poor treatment of crime victims and their families.

Ultimately, Hill interviewed me on camera for a few hours. As he departed, I wished him well and then forgot all about his documentary.

Two days ago, Hill’s documentary was released for streaming on Paramount + . The title is 72 Seconds in Rittenhouse Square.

You can view the trailer by clicking on this picture:

The documentary is presented in three episodes. You can access it on Paramount +. If you don’t have a subscription, you can sign up for a free seven-day trial. Either way, I think you will find it to be engrossing, well-done and scrupulously fair to both sides.

And, yes, I make a series of brief appearances throughout the first two episodes.

Sometime after the interview, I met Linda Schellenger, Sean’s mother, at Lodge #5 of the Fraternal Order of Police which represents the rank and file of the Philadelphia Police. I had been asked to attend an FOP press conference by lawyers who were preparing to file an application to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court to have Krasner’s office removed from handling the appeal of Mumia Abu-Jamal, who was convicted in the early 1980s for the murder of Philadelphia Police Officer Danny Faulkner.

The article below describes what happened that day at the FOP lodge. But, when I wrote it, I left out two things.

First, I was having a hard time that day adjusting to the fact that I was actually inside Lodge #5 and in one piece. Decades earlier, I had been Chief of the District Attorney’s Police Brutality/Misconduct Unit in which capacity my unit and I investigated and prosecuted Philadelphia police officers for illegal acts. Back then, they had my picture displayed over the bar at the old Lodge #5 building. I don’t think that was done out of respect and never took the gesture as a compliment.

Nevertheless, although that day at Lodge #5 some of the old-timers glared at me, nobody split my head open.

Second, Danny Faulkner’s widow, Maureen, introduced me that day to Linda Schellenger.

As I shook her hand, she thanked me for the Inquirer articles I had written about her son’s case, and then she started to cry.

This brave woman who had lost her son under horrible circumstances and who was re-victimized by District Attorney Larry Krasner was thanking me for the pittance that I had done. And that’s when I lost it. I burst into tears and stood there gripping her hand. Neither one of us could stop crying as we held onto each other.

Finally, Maureen Faulkner came to the rescue by asking us to join her for a meal in the Lodge #5 lunchroom.

For a description of the rest of that day’s events, take a look at the article below.

And, by all means, be sure to view Tigre Hill’s 72 Seconds in Rittenhouse Square.

United in Grief

George Parry November 15, 2019

Pictured above are two extraordinarily courageous and remarkable women. Linda Schellenger, in grey, is the mother of a young man who was stabbed to death in Philadelphia’s Rittenhouse Square. Maureen Faulkner, in black, is the widow of Philadelphia Police Officer Danny Faulkner who was brutally murdered in 1981 by leftist icon Mumia Abu-Jamal.

Both women are victims of Larry Krasner, Philadelphia’s progressive District Attorney, who was elected with a $1.7 million campaign contribution from George Soros.

The picture was taken earlier this week at Lodge 5 of the Fraternal Order of Police, which represents Philadelphia police officers, shortly after Maureen Faulkner and her lawyers announced the filing of a petition in the Pennsylvania Supreme Court seeking the removal of Krasner’s office from any further involvement in Jamal’s case which, after 37 years of litigation, is still on appeal.

The Philadelphia Inquirer has published my opinion pieces criticizing Krasner’s handling of both cases. While I have known Maureen Faulkner for years, I had never met Linda Schellenger until that day at the FOP. When I was introduced to her, she began thanking me for what I had written about her son’s case and then started to cry. Being the hard-boiled former crime fighter that I am, I began crying, too.

Maureen’s petition and my conversation with Linda resulted in my writing another opinion piece about Philadelphia District Attorney Krasner. My friends at the Inky published it on line here, and it will appear in the print edition sometime next week.

Due to space limitations imposed by the print medium, the editors had to omit parts of what I had submitted. But my friends at Broad + Liberty (a terrific free online publication) are preparing to run my full submission with the omitted parts included. Set forth below is what I sent to Broad + Liberty.

As I have noted before, even though this deals with Philadelphia’s progressive district attorney, George Soros has been buying up prosecutors’ offices across the country. A similar version of the nightmare described below may be coming to your community courtesy of Soros and his billions.

Read and heed.

REMOVING DISTRICT ATTORNEY KRASNER FROM THE MUMIA ABU-JAMAL CASE WOULD BE A STEP FORWARD FOR VICTIMS AND THEIR FAMILIES

In 1981, Philadelphia Police Officer Danny Faulkner was brutally murdered by Mumia Abu Jamal. A multi racial jury convicted Jamal of first degree murder and sentenced him to death. Since then, he has pursued endless appeals in state and federal courts.  Although his death sentence was overturned on a technicality, his conviction has been repeatedly affirmed. Throughout this lengthy process, the Commonwealth has been zealously represented by three previous District Attorneys. But now the defense of Jamal’s conviction is in the hands of District Attorney Larry Krasner, the self-styled “public defender with power”, who during his short time in office has established an appalling record of undercharging violent criminals and astonishing indifference to the interests of crime victims.

Now, after 37 years of appeals, Jamal has filed a motion for a new trial based on newly-discovered evidence of alleged misconduct by the trial prosecutor.  But Krasner’s office has never consulted the accused trial prosecutor concerning the allegations of misconduct. And, instead of contesting those accusations, Krasner’s office text messaged Maureen Faulkner, the murdered police officer’s long-suffering widow, that it was consenting to allow a hearing to proceed on these allegations. The abject failure to even consult the trial prosecutor and the unwarranted consent to a hearing on those allegations raise serious questions regarding Krasner’s intentions and his willingness to zealously oppose this latest move by Jamal to gain his freedom.

Accordingly, this week attorneys representing Maureen Faulkner petitioned the Pennsylvania Supreme Court to disqualify Krasner’s office from any further involvement in the Jamal case based on multiple conflicts of interest. The meticulous and carefully crafted petition is supported by damning exhibits that amply demonstrate why Krasner should be removed from the case. Among these exhibits is a detailed affidavit by the accused prosecutor refuting each and every claim of misconduct and stating under oath that he has never been contacted by Krasner’s office about these claims.

The petition also points out that the head of Krasner’s appellate unit, which is responsible for defending Jamal’s conviction, previously represented Jamal in the appeal of his conviction. In that regard, the petition avers that, when the head of Krasner’s appellate unit previously represented Jamal, he filed pleadings in the Supreme Court alleging that Jamal is innocent and that his conviction was the result of “fabricated evidence, subornation of perjury and a false confession.” In addition, the petition sets forth that Krasner himself has publicly described the former prosecutors who fought to uphold Jamal’s conviction as “war criminals.”

I attended the press conference at which Maureen Faulkner and her lawyer announced the filing of the petition. Sitting quietly in the audience was Linda  Schellenger whose son was stabbed to death in Rittenhouse Square. I later had an opportunity to talk with her. She is dignified, well-spoken, intelligent, highly credible and sincere. And while I thought I knew all of the relevant facts of how Krasner had aborted the case against Michael White, her son’s assailant, I was sadly mistaken.

Immediately after White’s arrest, based on the clear evidence that Linda’s son had died from a literal stab in the back, an assistant district attorney properly charged first degree murder. Subsequently, however, Krasner forced that assistant district attorney to resign and dropped the charge to third degree murder. Then, on the eve of trial, Krasner again reduced the charge to manslaughter.

According to Linda, when she met with Krasner to  respectfully question his handling of the case, he became angry and screamed at her. So what kind of person yells at a grieving mother for daring to ask questions about her dead son’s case? And what does this behavior tell us about Krasner’s commitment to pursuing the full measure of justice for crime victims and their loved ones?

Linda also repeated her nationally televised accusation that Krasner had suppressed evidence found on social media of the assailant declaring before the attack on her son that he “was going to kill someone” and afterward rapping about “blood in the streets.”  Krasner’s office never sought a ruling by the court as to whether these declarations could be presented to the jury. Instead, Krasner’s office hid this evidence.

As documented in the Philadelphia Inquirer and elsewhere, Krasner and his office have repeatedly and consistently demonstrated an indifference bordering on disdain for the rights and concerns of crime victims and their families. But now, thanks to the courage of Maureen Faulkner and Linda Schellenger, it is becoming apparent that Krasner has a pernicious agenda calculated to deprive crime victims, their loved ones, and the public at large of the full protection of the law to which they are entitled.

So it is that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court should consider Maureen Faulkner’s petition in the overall context of the disaster that has befallen the people of Philadelphia with the election of Larry Krasner. While she  seeks Krasner’s removal from her husband’s murder case, her petition serves the broader societal interest of seeking the Court’s help in placing limits on what Krasner seems to believe is his unbridled discretion to abrogate his obligation to zealously and fully enforce the law.

Hopefully the Court will remove Krasner from the Jamal case so that Pennsylvania’s Attorney General may take over and vigorously oppose the murderer’s latest bid to get out of prison. Maybe then, chastened by the Supreme Court and with the example of the Attorney General zealously defending Jamal’s conviction, Krasner will begin to realize that as a prosecutor he has a sacred duty to protect the public whom he purports to serve.

[Update: The Supreme Court did not remove Krasner from the case but made it clear that it was prepared to do so if Krasner tried any funny business. That worked, and Mumia Abu Jamal’s seemingly endless series of appeals ended unsuccessfully. He remains in prison.]

Author’s note: In the interest of full disclosure, I am close friends with Joseph McGill, my former colleague in the Philadelphia District Attorney’s Office who successfully prosecuted Jamal for the Faulkner murder. I know and admire and have provided legal services to Faulkner’s courageous widow, Maureen. Finally, many years ago, I agreed to represent an African American who had been in the emergency room where Jamal was brought for treatment within minutes of his shooting Faulkner. This bystander heard Jamal angrily shout, “Yeah, I shot the motherf***er, and I hope he dies!”