ShareThis Page
Valley News Dispatch

Police: Chase of Pittsburgh man topped 100 mph

Matthew Medsger
| Thursday, June 14, 2018, 1:06 p.m.
www.weisspaarz.com

A Pittsburgh man will head to court after state police say he led multiple police agencies on high speed chases in March.

Richard Andrew Edmonds, 24, is charged with a felony count of fleeing or attempting to elude police and related summary charges.

Edmonds waived his right to a preliminary hearing Wednesday before District Judge Carolyn Bengel in Brackenridge.

Police say Edmonds just before 5 p.m. March 11 was driving a red Dodge Charger north on Route 28. State troopers received a complaint from a driver, who said that red Charger passed cars on the highway by driving on the shoulder.

State police Trooper Vincent Canzoneri says in court documents he learned that car also was involved in a high speed chase with the Pittsburgh Police Department earlier the same day.

But, Canzoneri says, the vehicle fled when he tried to pull it over near the Creighton exit on Route 28.

“I was travelling approximately 100 mph at the time, and the red Charger was continuing to pull away,” Canzoneri wrote in court documents.

Out of concern for public safety, the pursuit was called off. A search of the vehicle's license plate number revealed it was registered to Edmonds, police say. He eventually was arrested May 25.

Edmonds is free on bond ahead of a formal arraignment scheduled for July 30 in Pittsburgh.

Matthew Medsger is a Tribune-Review staff writer. Reach him at 724-226-4675, mmedsger@tribweb.com or via Twitter @matthew_medsger.

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.

click me