ShareThis Page
Zappala blasts request to drop Orie’s charges |

Zappala blasts request to drop Orie’s charges

| Saturday, February 5, 2011 12:00 a.m

Allegheny County District Attorney Stephen A. Zappala Jr. fired back Friday against state Senate Republicans by claiming the alleged criminal actions of Sen. Jane Orie could in no way be viewed as acceptable.

Zappala filed the 17-page response in the state Supreme Court a day after the Senate caucus’ 194-page motion seeking emergency action to dismiss the charges against the McCandless Republican.

Jury selection is scheduled to begin Tuesday in the case, unless the state’s high court acts. Zappala charged Orie, then the majority whip, in April with theft of services and conflict of interest. He accused her of using state-paid legislative staff to do campaign work for her and her sister, state Supreme Court Justice Joan Orie Melvin.

“Certainly the utilization of Senate resources and staff to promote her sister’s political campaign could in no way be (considered) as an ‘acceptable practice’ under Pennsylvania law,” Zappala’s motion states.

The Republican Senate caucus claims the state’s conflict-of-interest statute is vague and unconstitutional and is seeking a delay in Orie’s case. Orie’s attorney, William Costopoulos, filed similar motions.

A second sister, Janine Orie, an aide to Melvin, faces similar charges and is scheduled for trial Tuesday. Melvin has not been charged but is under a grand jury investigation.

Zappala wrote that Orie is a lawyer, former prosecutor and politician and is no stranger to laws governing politicians.

Costopoulos has declined to comment, citing a gag order in the case.

Orie claims she is being targeted because of her opposition to gambling, to which Zappala’s family has connections.

Categories: News
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.