Share This Page

Man accused of killing two in Washington Township gets new lawyer

| Thursday, Nov. 15, 2012, 12:02 a.m.

A new attorney has been appointed to represent a Ligonier man accused of killing two people during a robbery last year in Washington Township.

Westmoreland County Judge Rita Hathaway on Wednesday appointed Greensburg attorney Mike DeMatt to represent Eric Hall, 24, in the pending homicide trial.

Hall, 30, is awaiting trial for the Aug. 28, 2011 slaying of Anthony Henderson and Noelle Richards, both 24. Police said Hall bludgeoned Henderson with a baseball bat, then fatally shot him and Richards.

Hall was arrested on Dec. 13 at his mother's house in Ligonier.

He previously was represented by the county Public Defender's Office, but last week office lawyers asked to be dismissed from the case.

In court documents, public defenders Greg Cecchetti and John Sweeney said their office had a conflict of interest because it represented a potential witness for the prosecution against Hall.

According to court records, investigators last month questioned Raymond Rivera, an Arnold man who has been in jail for more than a year awaiting his trial on murder charges.

Rivera, 35, is accused of shooting 37-year-old John L. Evans and wounding his cousin, Willie J. Young, on Oct. 20, 2011 in front of the Family Dollar Store in Central City Plaza in downtown New Kensington.

Rivera's trial is slated to start in March.

No trial date has been scheduled for Hall.

Rich Cholodofsky is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 724-830-6293 or rcholodofsky@tribweb.com.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.