This is malicious prosecution. I have a funny feeling the DA wouldn't represent them in the case unless the charge was a misdemeanor or higher. DA's don't prosecute or represent police officer's in summary trials. All this just so they can have legal representation? If they knew they had a bad case an honest person would have withdrew the citation. What are they going to do when Michael is found not guilty? This just proves the lengths they will go to take freedoms away from us. I pray that God is honored in this and that he knocks down this repressive State System. They are operating above the law.

It is not necessary to change charges for the District Attorney's Office to assume prosecution. We can represent the Commonwealth in all cases, including summaries. Because of manpower limitations, we normally don't handle summaries unless requested by a local police department.

In this case a request was made because of the need to argue constitutional law issues outside the scope of the expertise of most police officers. The defendant intended to make his legal arguments through an attorney with experience in that area. The police wanted an attorney to argue their position as well.

The charge was changed from a summary to a misdemeanor because, upon review of the case by my office, we determined that the evidence does not support the summary charge (which has requirements concerning the purpose for which the tresspass was committed), but does support the misdemeanor charge, because notice was provided in person. I decided that it would be unfair (and ultimately futile) to prosecute under the wrong section of Tresspass. However, I see a need to enforce Tresspass laws, and believe a prosecution under the correct subsection is appropriate. That subsection happens to be graded a misdemeanor.

Joe Carroll
District Attorney
Chester County

mr. carroll, your desire to prosecute criminals is commendable. please prosecute the staff killing babies, the mothers hiring them and all homosexuals in your district. thank you, tobra who is a concerned voter

District Attorney Carroll,

With respect to you and your Office sir. Are you trying to tell me that a person can't stand on the sidewalk with a sign. That the Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education, who as a matter of fact operates a 240 man Police Department, can regulate that? With all your education in law you honestly think they are enforcing trespassing? Or would it be more correct to say that the suits from SSHE intimidated you into approving the misdemeanor charge. To lets say, shield them from any liability. I would like to know what you intend to do to safeguard the constitutional rights of pro-life and Christian activists on these public universities. Maybe it's time we look at deactivating SSHE and place them back under the Department of Education where they more appropriately belong. All that money going to operate their administrative center in Harrisburg. They obviously ignore the rule of law and the will of the people. They are out of touch and have operated outside of the law. I look forward to seeing this ridiculous school policy overturned by the courts and the police power removed from the "administrators". As we both know, this is completely unconstitutional. What side of freedom are you on sir??

With respect,
Steve

What juristiction do "campus police" have to cite anyone for a perceived violation of "trespass" NEAR the campus? Maybe I'm not understanding. And if they have no legal standing to cite Marcavage, what right do they have to refer it to, or request the DA office to escalate the initial unlawful summary? Stop the insanity!!!