ShareThis Page

Suspect jailed for allegedly stealing $1,031 in goods from Walmart

Joe Napsha
| Tuesday, Dec. 19, 2017, 12:18 a.m.

A 24-year-old Ruffsdale man will stand trial on accusations he stole more than $1,000 worth of merchandise from a Walmart store in North Huntingdon.

Jacob Wayne Connelly of Ruffsdale Road was ordered held for court by North Huntingdon District Judge Wayne Gongaware during Connelly's preliminary hearing Dec. 13 on felony charges of theft and receiving stolen property and a misdemeanor count of defiant trespass. He was returned to the Westmoreland County Prison, where he is being held in lieu of $25,000 bond.

North Huntingdon police accused Connelly of stealing 36 Blu-Ray DVDs, two 4K DVDs, a Play Station controller and a pillow and blanket from the Walmart store on Mills Drive, at about 1 p.m. Dec. 5, North Huntingdon police said.

Connelly allegedly placed the items in a shopping cart and covered them with a blanket and hamper, and left the store without paying for the items, police said in the affidavit filed against the suspect. Walmart store security summoned North Huntingdon police to the store and then police pursued the suspect's Jeep as it traveled westbound on Route 30. Connelly was stopped by police near the Buttermilk Hollow Road intersection and the store merchandise allegedly was visible in the back seat.

Connelly is scheduled to be arraigned before Westmoreland County Judge Meagan A. Bilik-DeFazio on Feb. 20.

Joe Napsha is a Tribune-Review staff writer. Reach him at 724-836-5252 or jnapsha@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.