Holding The Line

As we wrap up our second season of Holding the Line, we're looking back at some of the conversations that shaped this season—and the questions that kept coming up again and again.

From prosecutors and academics to crime-data experts and technology researchers, our guests took us into very different corners of America's criminal justice system. But beneath those conversations were some common themes:

What happens when the institutions responsible for public safety stop functioning as they should?

What does the evidence actually tell us about crime?

And how do we make sound public policy when so much of the debate is driven by politics, ideology, media narratives, and incomplete information?

In this season finale, Jason Johnson revisits several of the conversations that stood out most, including:

• Philadelphia attorney George Bochetto on his years challenging Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner and the consequences of progressive prosecutorial policies.
• Professor Peter Moskos on crime data, policing, and the importance of knowing WHO is at the table when it comes to setting policy.
• Dr. Laura Huey on criminology, crime prevention, victims rights, and the complicated relationship between academic theories and real-world criminal justice policy.
• Charles Fain Lehman on automated license plate readers, Flock, privacy, regulation, and the role technology can play in preventing and solving crime.

Together, these conversations point toward a fundamental question: How do we build a justice system that protects people while preserving accountability?

That's the question we've been exploring throughout Holding the Line—and it's one we'll continue exploring in Season 3.

Thank you for listening, sharing episodes, leaving reviews, and helping us grow this show. If you haven't already, subscribe to Holding the Line, leave us a five-star review, and share an episode with someone who cares about policing, crime, and public safety.

Season 3 is coming soon—and something very special is in the works as well. Stay tuned.

On this week’s episode of Holding the Line, LELDF President Jason Johnson and Director of Policy Sean Kennedy take a deep dive into progressive prosecutors, outside influence, and what LELDF has uncovered through our investigation into Soros DAs.

Sean went to Austin this week to testify before the Texas House Select Committee on Oversight about the influence of third-party organizations on prosecutors’ offices—including what our research uncovered about the Wren Collective and its connections to prosecutors across the country.

You won't want to miss what Sean exposed about how donors and activists are secretly running many of America’s prosecutors’ offices—including many in the Lone Star State.

Much of his testimony was based on the findings of his report Outsourcing Justice—based on dozens of public records requests and over 50,000 pages of texts and emails.

Watch Sean's testimony here: https://leldf.substack.com/p/leldf-policy-director-goes-to-texas

And read Outsourcing Justice here: https://www.policedefense.org/outsourcing-justice/

For years, Larry Krasner has escaped accountability for his gross misconduct as Philadelphia's Attorney General—conflicts of interest, misleading courts, and aggressive efforts to overturn criminal convictions. He was impeached in 2022, but remained in office (stay tuned to find out why) - but now, the courts are finally stepping in.

He was impeached in 2022, but remained in office (stay tuned to find out why) - but now, the courts are finally stepping in.

In this explosive episode of Holding the Line, Sean Kennedy sits down with Philadelphia attorney George Bochetto, one of the most persistent legal opponents of the Krasner administration, to examine the extraordinary developments surrounding Philadelphia’s Soros-backed district attorney.

A federal judge has referred Larry Krasner and one of his top prosecutors to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for a potential criminal investigation.

After conducting an evidentiary hearing, U.S. District Judge Paul Diamond concluded that the evidence could constitute false statements, false declarations under oath, perjury, obstruction of justice, and conspiracy. He disqualified Krasner and his top assistant, Matthew Stiegler, from the case and referred the matter for investigation.

Even more extraordinary: the allegations came from senior prosecutors inside Krasner’s own office.

As George explains, prosecutors testified about pressure they say they received from Krasner while handling a case involving a convicted murderer. They told the court that Krasner instructed them to act in a way that would “protect the office” and warned that there would be “consequences” if they alerted the court to conflicts they believed needed to be disclosed.

And this wasn't an isolated courtroom controversy.

Earlier this year, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court found that Krasner’s office had misled courts and violated its duty of candor in its efforts to overturn a murder conviction. The court found the problems sufficiently serious and recurrent that it imposed a new layer of oversight: going forward, the Pennsylvania Attorney General's Office must be given an opportunity to review cases in which Krasner's office seeks to overturn convictions.

In other words, the state's highest court no longer trusts Krasner's office to police itself when seeking exonerations.

George Bochetto has been fighting to expose the Krasner administration's malfeasance for years. He discusses the cases that brought him into the fight, including Krasner's appalling efforts to free Mumia Abu-Jamal—a man who confessed to the execution-style murder of Philadelphia police officer Daniel Faulkner in 1981. We also discuss Krasner's outrageous prosecution of Philadelphia Police Sergeant Eric Bologna—as well as his role as special prosecutor in the Pennsylvania House's 2022 impeachment proceedings against Krasner.

The conversation also goes much deeper into the policies and outside political organizations that have shaped Krasner's office—including the role of the Wren Collective and Real Justice PAC, campaign spending, and the relationship between outside political groups and prosecutorial policy.

Because this goes FAR beyond Larry Krasner.

Want to learn more about the influence of the Wren Collective and Real Justice PAC? Read our report Outsourcing Justice: https://www.policedefense.org/outsourcing-justice/

We hope you enjoyed—and if you found this episode valuable, please subscribe and leave us a five-star review wherever you listen to podcasts.

Brady, Giglio, and Lewis Lists can have enormous consequences for law enforcement officers—but very few even know what these lists are or how they work.

In this episode of Holding the Line, Jason Johnson and Sean Kennedy discuss LELDF’s new report—Blacklisted: How Prosecutors Misuse Brady Lists to Deny Law Enforcement Officers’ Due Process Rights and Ruin Their Careers.

The study, based on FOIA requests and open-source documents, found:

Across the 50 states:

• Only 11 of 50 states have laws that regulate Brady Lists, and just three allow an independent appeal;
• Even those states with laws or guidance form a patchwork, lacking a consistent approach to how Brady compliance is conducted and what due process rights are afforded to officers;
• Reforms keep failing (Texas) or being watered down (Tennessee) in state legislatures, limiting officers’ rights;
• Some states have built in loopholes that undermine the reforms (i.e., Florida regulates only offices that keep lists but doesn’t require offices to maintain them).

While Brady lists are an important tool to protect the rights of the accused, courts have not defined how they should work, states and local prosecutors, by and large, failed to protect officers’ due process rights in the process.

LELDF’s proposed reforms will ensure cops get the same rights as criminals.

Read the new report at policedefense.org/blacklisted

Holding the Line: A Podcast About Cops, Courts, and Crime is produced by the Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund.

25 years after the Islamic terror attacks of September 11, 2001, America is once again pausing to remember one of the darkest days in our nation's history - but have we truly kept our promise to never forget?

In this special anniversary episode of Holding the Line, LELDF President Jason Johnson and Director of Policy Sean Kennedy reflect on where they were when America came under attack—and on the fear, uncertainty, grief, sacrifice, and extraordinary unity that followed.

Jason shares his experience as a police officer living in the Washington, D.C. area on September 11, while Sean recalls watching the attacks unfold as a 17-year-old high school student in California. Together, they remember a country where strangers lined up to donate blood, churches filled, Americans thanked police officers and firefighters, and countless people asked one question: What can I do to help?

They also remember the extraordinary sacrifice of the first responders who ran toward danger as others fled.

Seventy-two law enforcement officers were killed on September 11, including 37 Port Authority police officers and 23 members of the NYPD. In the years since, hundreds more law enforcement officers have died from illnesses linked to their exposure at Ground Zero.

And the toll continues.

Today, Jason and Sean ask whether the unity Americans experienced in the aftermath of 9/11 has faded—and whether younger generations are being taught not only what happened that day, but what America witnessed in the days and weeks that followed.

What does “Never Forget” really mean?

Does it mean remembering the images of the attacks? The nearly 3,000 innocent people who were murdered? The first responders who gave their lives? The Americans who joined the military and public safety professions in the years that followed?

Or does it also mean remembering something else?

The way Americans came together and understood our common enemy—recognizing the evil we were fighting against.

This episode is a conversation—and a challenge—to remember.

Where were you on September 11, 2001?

What do you remember about the days that followed?

And, 25 years later, have we truly lived up to our promise to never forget?

We want to hear your memories. Share your stories and photos with us on social media at @LELDF.

Subscribe to Holding the Line: A Podcast About Cops, Courts, and Crime on your favorite podcast platform—and please leave us a five-star review.

Flock cameras have quickly become one of the most controversial tools in American law enforcement.

But why?

On this episode of Holding the Line, Jason Johnson and Sean Kennedy sit down with Charles Fain Lehman, a research fellow at the Manhattan Institute and one of the leading voices pushing back against the growing backlash against Flock and automatic license plate readers (ALPRs).

What exactly does Flock do? Is it really a mass-surveillance system? How does it differ from the license plate readers police have used for decades? And what about the legitimate concerns over privacy and potential abuse?

Charles breaks down the technology, the misconceptions surrounding it, and the real-world cases where Flock cameras have helped police find missing children, locate wanted suspects, recover stolen vehicles, and solve serious crimes.

He also makes the case that the answer isn't to eliminate the technology—but to establish reasonable guardrails governing how police can access, retain, and use the information.

And Charles has created a resource to help people see the evidence for themselves: FlockStopsCrime.com

Charles' Flock Crime Prevention Tracker is a daily-updated database of news stories documenting cases in which Flock cameras helped solve or prevent crimes. As of September 4, the database contains 1,714 documented incidents.

The database includes cases involving everything from vehicle theft and shootings to homicide, robbery, burglary, hit-and-runs, and missing or abducted people.

Explore the database:
FlockStopsCrime.com — Flock Crime Prevention Tracker

Charles Fain Lehman is a fellow at the Manhattan Institute and contributing editor at City Journal. His work focuses on crime, drugs, public disorder, and the public policy of antisocial behavior.

Charles recently published “In Defense of Flock,” making the case that police camera technology can provide significant public-safety benefits while still allowing for meaningful safeguards against abuse.

Read Charles Fain Lehman's “In Defense of Flock”

What happens when we stop arguing about policing in the abstract and look at what actually works?

On this episode of Holding the Line we’re joined by Peter Moskos, professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice and former Baltimore City police officer who has vital insights on the realities of policing, crime reduction, and the lessons we can learn from some of America’s most dramatic crime declines.

Moskos brings a rare perspective to the conversation: he studied policing as an academic, then became a cop himself, working in Baltimore’s Eastern District before returning to academia. His experience informs his approach to studying crime and policing—and his insistence that effective policing deserves to be taken seriously.

The conversation explores the remarkable decline in violent crime in New York City during the 1990s, including the role of CompStat, accountability, targeting repeat violent offenders, and a fundamental shift toward making crime reduction an explicit priority of the NYPD.

Moskos also discusses why academics and policymakers can be too quick to search for a single explanation for complex changes in crime, why correlation shouldn't be dismissed as meaningless, and why successful policing strategies deserve closer examination rather than ideological dismissal.

The conversation also tackles the unintended consequences of measuring police departments by statistics, the evolution of body cameras, civilian oversight, what separates good police departments from bad ones, and the ongoing debate over police reform and abolition.

Finally, Moskos weighs in on Baltimore's dramatic recent decline in homicides and why effective police leadership, prosecution, and targeted efforts against repeat violent offenders may offer important lessons for other cities.

Peter Moskos is the author of Back from the Brink, an examination of the New York City crime decline.

Follow him on X: https://x.com/PeterMoskos

Get your copy of Back from the Brink: 

https://www.amazon.com/dp/0197797776

Holding the Line is a podcast about cops, courts, and crime from the Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund - follow us everywhere @ LELDF

In this episode of Holding the Line, Jason Johnson sits down with Bill Alexander, CEO of the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund, to talk about the challenges facing American law enforcement—and why, despite those challenges, there are many reasons to be optimistic about the future of policing in America.

Bill brings more than 30 years of law enforcement experience to his work at the Memorial Fund, where he now leads an organization dedicated to honoring fallen officers, telling the story of American law enforcement, and making the profession safer.

Jason and Bill discuss:

• The surprising breadth of public support for law enforcement and why Bill's perception of that support changed dramatically after joining the Memorial Fund.
• The stories behind the names on the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial and why fallen officers should be remembered not simply as statistics, but as fathers, mothers, sons, daughters, friends, coworkers, and members of their communities.
• What the Memorial Fund's officer safety and wellness work can teach us about preventing future line-of-duty deaths.
• The changing approach to officer safety, including the growing emphasis on vehicle safety, physical wellness, and other risks that can be overlooked when we focus exclusively on violent deaths.
• What the public misunderstands about police use of force, including the fundamental disconnect between what many people believe police officers are legally allowed to do and the actual rules governing the use of force.
• Why officers may hesitate to use force even when they are legally authorized to do so, and how political pressure, media coverage, and fear of discipline or prosecution can affect decision-making.
• The growing fear among officers of being punished for doing their jobs, even when they follow their training and the law.
• The recruitment and retention crisis facing law enforcement—and the surprising reason Bill remains hopeful about the future.
• The next generation of police officers, who Bill and Jason believe may be bringing greater flexibility, thoughtfulness, and communication skills to the profession.
• Why every law enforcement officer should experience Police Week at least once and what it can teach them about the people and families behind the names on the Memorial.

Despite the challenges facing American policing, Bill says he continues to encounter young people who are willing to dedicate their lives to serving their communities. For him, that willingness—and the quality of many of those entering the profession—is a powerful reason for hope.

Learn more about the incredible work of the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund—and plan your visit: nleomf.org

On this episode of Holding the Line, Sean Kennedy sits down with Professor Laura Huey of the University of Western Ontario, a criminologist and policing researcher whose path into the field began not through law enforcement, but through personal experience with victimization and growing up in a family where police were frequently called.

Huey has spent decades studying policing and victimization in marginalized communities, including extensive work in Vancouver, Los Angeles, and Skid Row. She brings a perspective that challenges some of the conventional assumptions about crime, policing and criminal justice.

Please enjoy this episode and admire Sean’s restraint not making too many Canadian jokes.

FOLLOW Dr. Huey on X: https://x.com/ProfLauraHuey

Her book The Wicked Problems of Police Reform in Canada: https://a.co/d/0dFBJ107

Her book Evidence Based Policing: An Introduction: https://www.amazon.com/Evidence-based-policing-Ren%C3%A9e-Mitchell-ebook/dp/B07KY1R91F?ref_=ast_author_mpb

The conversation explores:

• Why some of the people most vulnerable to violent victimization are also the least likely to report crimes.
• What Laura learned from working in Skid Row and other marginalized communities.
• The impossible demands placed on police in communities struggling with addiction, mental illness, homelessness and crime.
• Whether diversion programs and other alternative approaches to policing actually work—and why Huey is skeptical of poorly designed evaluations.
• How governments can create incentives for organizations to evaluate their own programs.
• The difference between funding temporary programs and investing in permanent solutions to problems like addiction and mental illness.
• The complicated relationship between homelessness, mental illness, addiction and victimization.
• Why “compassion” without meaningful intervention can sometimes leave vulnerable people trapped in cycles of addiction, crime and victimization.
• Why victims don't report crimes—and what happens when people lose confidence that the justice system will protect them.
• How underfunding police, courts and other parts of the criminal justice system ultimately affects victims.
• The differences between the Canadian and American approaches to criminal justice.

Huey's answer to that final question is straightforward: FUND the criminal justice system—and fund independent research to make sure we're actually getting what we're paying for.

This is a wide-ranging conversation about policing, public safety, victims and the difficult problems that governments often prefer not to confront.

For a Holding the Line first, we're marking this episode EXPLICIT since Dr. Huey has an admittedly filthy mouth. Listener discretion is advised.

It feels like the era of "Soros DAs" is coming to an end...

High-profile recalls, election defeats, and growing public backlash have fueled the perception that the progressive prosecutor movement is losing momentum.

But is it?

This week, Sean Kennedy is joined by Parker Thayer, investigative reporter and researcher at the Capital Research Center, to examine how the movement has changed over the past decade. 

Rather than disappearing, Parker argues that the organizations, donor networks, and nonprofit infrastructure behind progressive prosecutors have adapted—becoming more sophisticated, more decentralized, and in many cases, harder to track.

Together, they explore how billionaire-funded nonprofits, advocacy organizations, and political action committees continue to shape criminal justice policy long after Election Day—and why understanding this ecosystem is just as important as understanding the prosecutors themselves.

Parker estimates roughly $1 billion invested over two decades into prosecutor campaigns and related nonprofits.

If you want to understand how criminal justice policy is really shaped, this episode lays it out.

This episode covers: 

• How George Soros built the modern prosecutor movement
• Why nonprofit organizations—not campaigns—now drive criminal justice policy
• The billion-dollar ecosystem supporting progressive prosecutors
• Why donors are becoming increasingly secretive
• How these organizations control over 50 DAs offices nationwide

If you enjoyed this episode following the money behind America's progressive prosecutor movement, follow Parker and dig into the outstanding work of the Capital Research Center:

https://x.com/ParkerThayer

https://x.com/capitalresearch

https://capitalresearch.org/

https://www.influencewatch.org/