The Office of the District Attorney issued a formal statement late Wednesday night disputing a report from The Jamestown Times that alleged the office declines to prosecute “petty cases” — including one involving a member of its own staff — in order to protect personal relationships.
The Jamestown Times report, published September 16th under the headline “Above the Law? Underwood Declines to Prosecute Friend,” cited internal screenshots reportedly showing District Attorney FrancisHUnderwood characterizing a case against Atellus, Assistant Chief of Police for the Kaslo Township Police Department, as a “petty case” not worth pursuing through the Public Integrity Bureau. A follow-up piece from the Times additionally referenced an alleged leaked prosecution list naming individuals said to be affiliated with the TRF high command, and detailed further internal exchanges regarding oversight of the Special Investigations Bureau.
The DA’s Office Responds
In a statement released through the Office of the District Attorney, Underwood said the office’s charging decisions are “based on the facts and the law” and not on personal relationships. The statement noted that Harrison County faces a high volume of violent crime relative to the office’s resources, and argued that declining to pursue every case is a routine function of prosecutorial discretion rather than evidence of favoritism.
Declining to pursue the highest charge or punishment possible in a matter is not the same as declining accountability.
“Declining to pursue the highest charge or punishment possible in a matter is not the same as declining accountability,” the statement read, noting that the office frequently resolves matters through Deferred Prosecution Agreements, referrals to Internal Affairs, and negotiated dispositions.
The office also pointed to Article V of the County Charter, which grants the District Attorney sole discretion over whether to initiate, continue, negotiate, or dismiss a criminal case, and states that no county officer may direct or interfere with that discretion in any individual matter.
The statement further asserted that the screenshots underlying the Jamestown Times report were obtained through an unauthorized channel and in violation of an employee’s Non-Disclosure Agreement, calling the unauthorized disclosure “a separate matter” the office says it is now reviewing.
In an accompanying statement, Underwood said: “This Office prosecutes based on the law, the evidence, and the resources we are given to work with, nothing else. I welcome scrutiny of my record. I do not welcome this Office’s confidential work product being leaked and mischaracterized as a shortcut around that scrutiny.”
The release was co-signed by Deputy District Attorney ElloM8HowAreYou. The office said it would not comment further on ongoing personnel or internal review matters, and directed members of the public and press with questions about specific cases to its public information channels.
What Remains Unaddressed
The DA’s Office statement responds directly to the characterization of the Atellus case as a “petty case,” but does not address the separate allegations raised in the Jamestown Times’ follow-up report, including the claims regarding an alleged leaked prosecution list or the internal dispute over the proposed independence of the Special Investigations Bureau as a standalone law enforcement agency.
This is a developing story.