ShareThis Page

Psychologist hired to provide mitigation testimony for 1 of 6 convicted in Greensburg torture slaying

| Friday, May 19, 2017, 11:00 p.m.
A Westmoreland County Prison provided photo shows Melvin Knight, convicted in the 2010 torture-murder of a mentally challenged teenager.

Updated 5 hours ago

Taxpayers will pay up to $10,000 for a psychologist hired by the defense to provide mitigation testimony in the upcoming sentencing trial for Melvin Knight, one of six Greensburg roommates convicted in the February 2010 torture slaying of a mentally disabled woman.

Knight, 27, formerly of Swissvale was sentenced to death in 2012 for his role in the fatal torture of Jennifer Daugherty, 30, of Mt. Pleasant. A state appeals court last year vacated the sentence.

Common Pleas Court Judge Rita Hathaway on Friday approved a request from new court-appointed defense attorneys Jim Robinson and Tim Dawson to hire Jennifer R. Wynn, a criminologist and mitigation specialist at City University of New York.

Wynn will be tasked with finding evidence from Knight's background that can be used to convince a jury to impose a sentence of life in prison rather than death by lethal injection.

The judge ordered that Wynn's pay be capped and that she submit monthly invoices billed at $100 per hour.

Hathaway said last month jury selection will begin Sept. 25 and she will allot two weeks for the penalty phase, which is to begin on Oct. 16.

Five codefendants in the case may be called to testify, Dawson said last month.

Dawson plans to call psychologists, family members, friends and anyone who can support the mitigating factors admissible in a death sentencing, he said.

Knight is being held at SCI Greene near Waynesburg.

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.