Krasner’s 2018 firing of top homicide prosecutor Carlos Vega was not discriminatory, jury finds

Another chapter in the bitter public feud between Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner and Carlos Vega, the former homicide prosecutor who unsuccessfully challenged him for his job last year, concluded Monday with a federal jury rejecting Vega’s lawsuit over Krasner’s decision to fire him in 2018.

It took less than two hours for the panel to reject Vega’s claims that his dismissal stemmed from a discriminatory campaign targeting older prosecutors as Krasner sought to reorient the District Attorney’s Office to fit his progressive vision.

The decision came after a six-day trial that laid bare the long-simmering animosity between the two men and shone a spotlight on one of Krasner’s earliest actions in office — his decision, days after his 2018 swearing in, to oust 30 veteran prosecutors and investigators who he believed would obstruct reforms he was seeking to implement.

» READ MORE: Philly DA Larry Krasner and allies slam impeachment and removal effort: ‘This is something you do for crimes’

The proceedings that played out in federal court proved at times to be embarrassing for both — first, as Krasner testified, he’d overheard Vega sexually harassing a woman in open court; then, as the woman in question, called to testify last week on Vega’s behalf, told jurors nothing of the sort had ever happened.

And at one point, Vega, 66, admitted on the witness stand that despite being unable to find a job since he was fired, he still sometimes comes to Center City in a suit and with an empty briefcase so people will assume he’s working.

But throughout it all, Krasner — who had been removed as a defendant in the lawsuit against the city last month — appeared in court every day, sitting just feet from his rival alongside lawyers for the city. The two never exchanged words.

“I’m grateful to the jury,” Krasner said Monday after the verdict was announced. “When both sides get to fully express themselves and the jury fully considers it, justice is served no matter the outcome.”

The victory came as Krasner finds his management of the District Attorney’s Office under increased scrutiny both in Philadelphia and in Harrisburg. Republican state lawmakers voted to impeach him last week — a move Krasner has dismissed as a political stunt.

» READ MORE: Why was DA Larry Krasner impeached? Breaking down the articles of impeachment

Meanwhile, the city has paid out more than $1.5 million to settle similar age-discrimination suits from four other staffers Krasner fired the same day as Vega.

Among them, Vega’s suit stood out as much for the stature he once enjoyed as one of the city’s go-to homicide prosecutors as for the deep level of animosity that has developed between him and Krasner since.

Last year, Krasner soundly defeated Vega to win reelection after an acrimonious Democratic primary campaign. Meanwhile, Vega has accused Krasner’s campaign of libeling him in a separate lawsuit pending in Common Pleas Court.

“In this particular case,” Philadelphia City Solicitor Diana Cortes said of the suit decided Monday, “we evaluated the evidence before us and we were very confident the city would prevail.”

Vega, a 35-year veteran of the office who tried some 500 murder cases during his tenure, told jurors last week that Krasner’s decision to fire him left him shattered.

“It’s embarrassing to say I’m broken,” he said, adding later: “I couldn’t believe it because I’ve worked under five administrations, and line prosecutors don’t get terminated.”

It’s common for elected officials to reorganize their staffs soon after taking office to better reflect their priorities and goals. As David Smith, an attorney representing the city, noted Monday, previous district attorneys also dismissed employees early on in their tenures.

Krasner, in a 2017 interview with The Intercept, said he took office primed for a fight against what he viewed as an entrenched “old guard” among the office staff that would be resistant to change.

“People are going to be made to leave because you cannot bring about real change and leave people in place who are going to fight change every step of the way,” he said, adding: “The ones who will leave will tend to be my generation, people who started in this business 30 years ago.”

Those remarks — along with several similar statements — formed the basis for Vega’s age-discrimination claims.

» READ MORE: Larry Krasner and Carlos Vega are still fighting even though the race for Philly DA is over

But Smith argued throughout the trial, Krasner had amassed plenty of other reasons to boot Vega — especially after the two squared off in court against each other in a capital murder case in 2016, shortly before Krasner launched his first campaign.

After the trial, Krasner called Vega unethical, “petty,” “abusive,” “disgraceful,” and a prime example of what he described as a “win at all costs” mentality at the District Attorney’s Office that he had vowed to dismantle.

At the time, Krasner was a civil rights and criminal defense attorney. His client was Ibrahim Muhammed, accused along with another man in a 2011 triple slaying inside a family-run bodega in West Philadelphia.

Krasner lost the case; Muhammed and his codefendant were convicted and sentenced to life in prison. But the future district attorney said he found Vega’s behavior during the trial astounding.

Krasner accused Vega of withholding crucial mitigating evidence in the run-up to the trial, and tampering with defense witnesses and later lying to a judge about it — all claims Vega denied.

It was also during that trial, Krasner testified, that he overheard Vega sexually harassing a paralegal of his defense cocounsel during a break in court.

“[He] said something to the effect that if she were to go on a date with him that she’d be basking in an orgasmic glow,” Krasner told jurors last week. “That’s basically a direct quote.”

Dustin Slaughter, who currently works for Krasner as a spokesperson for the District Attorney’s Office, testified that he recalled overhearing that comment, too.

But when Vega’s lawyers called the paralegal to the witness stand on Friday, she emphatically stated nothing of the sort had occurred.

Asked by Vega’s lawyer, Sidney Gold, whether he’d ever said anything inappropriate to her or made any remarks about “orgasm or orgasmic glow,” she responded: “Absolutely not.”

Speaking after the verdict Monday, Krasner said he stood by his account of those events.

But Smith, the lawyer representing the city, told jurors during his closing argument Monday that no matter what they concluded about the sexual harassment claim or Vega’s behavior at Muhammed’s trial, all that mattered was what Krasner believed about Vega at the time he decided to fire him.

“Mr. Vega was dismissed because Mr. Krasner regarded him as untruthful and unethical,” he said. “Mr. Krasner concluded that Mr. Vega was unworthy of serving in his administration.”