Does the United States Constitution and the First Amendment prohibit the Philadelphia District Attorney's Office from fabricating a crime and using a fabricated criminal prosecution to chill a detective's speech while hiding behind absolute or qualified immunity?

Philadelphia Police Detective Derrick Jacobs (Petitioner/Jacobs) observed newly elected Philadelphia District Attorney, Lawrence Krasner (“Krasner ”) and the Philadelphia District Attorney ’s Office (“DAO ”) engaging in corruption and criminal activity in 2018. The activities included tampering and fabricating evidence, along with soliciting perjury from witnesses in homicides and Officer Involved Shootings. After reporting the illegal activities to his superiors, Jacobs consulted with a Fraternal Order of Police (“FOP”) attorney. The interaction with the attorney was observed by Assistant District Attorney Tracy Tripp (“Tripp ”), who reported the activity to Krasner. In retaliation Krasner ordered Tripp to fabricate a criminal prosecution of Jacobs and threaten him with arrest unless he remained silent and stop reporting their corruption and criminal activity. After Tripp withdrew the prosecution of Jacobs he filed a federal civil rights complaint. Before and after filing the complaint Jacobs repeatedly informed his superiors of the DAO criminal activity. After Jacobs discussed his civil rights complaint publicly, The Philadelphia Police Department retaliated and constructively discharged Jacobs. 1. Does the United States Constitution and the First Amendment prohibit the Philadelphia District Attorney ’s Office from fabricating a crime. Using the fabricated crime in a fabricated criminal prosecution to chill a highly decorated detective ’s speech and hide behind absolute immunity or qualified immunity for fabricating a crime that never existed. 2. Does the United States Constitution and the First Amendment prohibit an employer, The Philadelphia Police Department, from retaliating against a citizen reporting on matters of public concern while petitioning the government for redress and claim the constructive discharge was because Jacobs reporting of corruption was “disruptive. ”. 2