Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 25 views

    Lebanon County DA Statement

    Uploaded by

    Matthew Toth
    The District Attorney of Lebanon County, Pier Hess Graf, received a private reprimand from the Pennsylvania Disciplinary Board regarding her involvement in investigating a 2020 officer-involved shooting. While Graf believed she properly followed her office's conflict of interest policy at the time, the Board determined she should have recused herself because her husband worked out of the same barracks as the trooper involved. Graf accepts the Board's decision, but maintains the investigation's outcome - that the shooting was justified - was valid. She has since crafted a new conflict policy and will refer officer-involved shootings to the Attorney General's office going forward.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Lebanon County DA Statement

    Uploaded by

    Matthew Toth
    25 views2 pages
    The District Attorney of Lebanon County, Pier Hess Graf, received a private reprimand from the Pennsylvania Disciplinary Board regarding her involvement in investigating a 2020 officer-involved shooting. While Graf believed she properly followed her office's conflict of interest policy at the time, the Board determined she should have recused herself because her husband worked out of the same barracks as the trooper involved. Graf accepts the Board's decision, but maintains the investigation's outcome - that the shooting was justified - was valid. She has since crafted a new conflict policy and will refer officer-involved shootings to the Attorney General's office going forward.

    Original Description:

    Lebanon County District Attorney Pier Hess Graf 7/18 statement

    Original Title

    Lebanon County DA statement

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The District Attorney of Lebanon County, Pier Hess Graf, received a private reprimand from the Pennsylvania Disciplinary Board regarding her involvement in investigating a 2020 officer-involved shooting. While Graf believed she properly followed her office's conflict of interest policy at the time, the Board determined she should have recused herself because her husband worked out of the same barracks as the trooper involved. Graf accepts the Board's decision, but maintains the investigation's outcome - that the shooting was justified - was valid. She has since crafted a new conflict policy and will refer officer-involved shootings to the Attorney General's office going forward.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    25 views2 pages

    Lebanon County DA Statement

    Uploaded by

    Matthew Toth
    The District Attorney of Lebanon County, Pier Hess Graf, received a private reprimand from the Pennsylvania Disciplinary Board regarding her involvement in investigating a 2020 officer-involved shooting. While Graf believed she properly followed her office's conflict of interest policy at the time, the Board determined she should have recused herself because her husband worked out of the same barracks as the trooper involved. Graf accepts the Board's decision, but maintains the investigation's outcome - that the shooting was justified - was valid. She has since crafted a new conflict policy and will refer officer-involved shootings to the Attorney General's office going forward.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 2

    Office of the District Attorney

    County of Lebanon
    400 South Eighth Street Telephone: 717-228-4403
    Room 11 Fax: 717-272-0839
    Lebanon, PA 17042

    Pier Hess Graf Jonathan Hess


    District Attorney Chief County Detective

    July 18, 2023


    As your District Attorney, I am committed to serving our community and offering full transparency
    to the people who elected me into office. In February of 2021, the local branch of the NAACP
    filed a complaint with Pennsylvania’s Disciplinary Board. This Board regulates, investigates and
    at times sanctions the conduct of any attorney licensed in Pennsylvania.
    The Complaint alleged impropriety in the nature of ‘conflict.’ Specifically, it alleged I should not
    have participated in the investigation of an officer-involved shooting which occurred in March of
    2020. With that shooting, a member of the Pennsylvania State Police took a life in the line of
    duty. Any loss of life – whether by law enforcement or otherwise – is both grave and sad. Our
    role in these cases, however, is to investigate and apply the facts and evidence to the law of
    ‘justified use of deadly force’ in PA. Our Office did just that and ruled the Trooper’s actions
    justified.
    As of the date of the shooting, our Office had a pre-existing conflict policy that enumerated
    instances wherein our Office could not handle any type of criminal investigation or case. One
    such area was in a case where my husband – currently a Corporal with the State Police – was a
    material witness or was actually involved. On the night of the shooting, my husband was not on
    duty and played no role in the incident. We followed our policy and believed it proper to do
    so. When I became District Attorney, I resolved to handle tough cases no matter how ugly the
    ramifications may be. When I handled this case, I simply wanted to do my job as best I could and
    in the manner I always have.
    Once the complaint was filed, I followed the standard practice and responded to the Disciplinary
    Board through counsel. We argued no conflict existed due to my husband’s utter lack of
    involvement. After a year and half back and forth, the Disciplinary Board issued its ruling. It
    found I should not have handled the shooting investigation because my husband worked out of the
    same barracks as the Trooper who used deadly force. In hindsight, I can understand the public
    scrutiny and the Board’s decision, though I still stand by the investigation and its outcome. We
    accepted the determination. Neither the Board nor any other agency has ever questioned the
    outcome of our investigation – that the shooting was justified under the law.
    The Board’s determination is labeled as ‘private reprimand.’ It in no way affects my law license
    or status as an attorney and would have remained sealed from public knowledge absent my choice
    to share it with the community I honorably serve. This statement, and the accountability which
    comes with it, is my choice alone.

    1
    Prior to the determination (in the Fall of 2022), I decided to refer any officer-involved shootings
    or fatal incidents to the Office of the Attorney General. I crafted a new conflict policy to avoid a
    situation of this kind from ever occurring again. I now view this matter as closed.
    Since taking office in 2020, I fight daily to ensure the work produced by my Office is worthy of
    your trust and your vote. We’ve handled more homicides and shootings in these past few years
    than ever before – and I personally handled every homicide case that went before jury, winning a
    First-Degree conviction each time. I will continue to work tirelessly to protect our citizens from
    the most heinous of criminals. The honor of being your District Attorney is more humbling than I
    can explain, and I thank you for your continued support.

    Pier Hess Graf, Esq.

    You might also like