ShareThis Page

Hempfield man who shot himself in the mouth charged with endangerment

Paul Peirce
| Monday, Oct. 2, 2017, 11:30 a.m.

A 50-year-old Hempfield man who accidentally shot himself in the mouth with a 9 mm handgun while drinking beer with friends in a Greensburg apartment in July is charged with reckless endangerment.

City police allege David A. Ballew of Armbrust endangered two other people in an apartment on the 700 block North Main Street before the incident about 4:18 p.m. July 22.

Detective Charles Irvin wrote in an affidavit that Ballew and John Shook were drinking a 12-pack of beer at Denise Glick's residence when Ballew pulled a handgun out of his waistband.

“Once inside, (Ballew) took out a gun and started pointing it at everyone. Glick stated she initially thought the gun was fake,” Irvin wrote in court papers filed before Senior District Judge James Albert.

“Dave then placed the gun in his own mouth and it went off,” Irvin quoted Glick as telling investigators.

Shook told Irvin that he didn't realize Ballew had a gun, but watched him pull it from his waistband, point it at him and say, “Watch this.”

Shook told police that Ballew then put the gun in his mouth and accidentally pulled the trigger.

The bullet lodged in the ceiling, police said.

Irvin said Glick and Shook provided first aid to Ballew until paramedics arrived and took him to Excela Health Westmoreland hospital in Greensburg.

Ballew's preliminary hearing is scheduled for Nov. 9 before Albert.

Paul Peirce is a Tribune-Review staff writer. Reach him at 724-850-2860, ppeirce@tribweb.com or via Twitter @ppeirce_trib.

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.